Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
On 12/4/13 12:27 PM, Joerg Mayer wrote: Hello, as Graham and I are working on getting the Windows build process to a) work at all and b) be on par with the current nmake build process we currently rely on the setup infrastructure of the nmake build. I really don't like porting the nmake -f Makefile.nmake setup to cmake. Not because it is hard to do but because the current setup has various shortcomings 1) zlib is installed as source only 2) portaudio is installed as source only I know there are historical reasons for this but are they still valid? Zlib packages are available from the OpenSUSE Build Service (linked against msvcrt.dll) and Nuget (linked against multiple runtimes). Portaudio is also available from OBS. 3) Every package is installed into its own subdirectory, sometimes with its own structure CoApp has a standardized directory layout for libraries and include files called Pivots: http://coapp.org/reference/autopackage-ref.html#Pivots Pivot is a nicer name than deep explodey directory tree but it seems sensible and worth adopting IMHO. 4) glib2 contains zlib headers that break windows builds 5) glib3 contains zlib headers that break windows builds This should be reported as a bug at https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/windows:mingw:win64/mingw64-zlib I'm sure patches are welcome. 6) krb5 contains includes that export krb5-build internal flags and thus cause warnings during compiles Is there a better library we can use for Kerberos? MIT, Secure Endpoints, and Heimdal all seem to provide packages that almost-but-not-quite meet our needs. I tried cross-compiling MIT Kerberos and Heimdal using MingW in the past but didn't have much luck. 6) Except for gtk3 no packages provide compile (includes, cflags) or linking (libs, ldflags) information. 7) glib3 contains pkg-config files, but they contain a wrong paths and unuseable compiler (gcc) flags The existence of the .pc files depends on my packaging scripts and the OBS .spec files for OBS-sourced packages. Adding them shouldn't be too difficult. The tricky part is getting them to point to the correct location on Windows. I'm not sure if we can use or modify the stock .pc files or if we'd have to create our own. 8) The current setup process does not install QT I've been hesitant to switch this on since it's such a large download and I'm not sure which Qt should be installed. The Qt project provides official 32- and 64-bit installers for VS 2012 and a 32-bit installer for VS 2010. We provide 32- and 64-bit packages for VS 2010. We sign the EXEs and DLLs in our packages but the Qt project doesn't. I don't know if anyone provides VS 2013 packages. 9) To build qtshark without wireshark still requires the installation of gtk2 or gtk3 for glib, gmodule, gthread I think we should switch from the separate wireshark-gtk2 and wireshark-qt-release directories to a common deployment directory, e.g. wireshark-deploy or wireshark-stage. This would presumably help to unify our build targets. (I'd also like to get rid of ui/qt/QtShark.pro at some point in favor of CMake. Qt Creator supports CMake projects well enough, and having to maintain QtShark.pro for different platforms is a pain.) 10) The setup process does not allow for the simultanous installation of gtk2 and gtk3 Does GTK3 work well enough on Windows to drop GTK2? This would simplify things quite a bit. 11) The installation of some build tools (python, cmake, cygwin-stuff like cat, bash) might be automated - depending on the setup script language maybe not all of them. So maybe something more similar to the macosx setup is wanted. Not maybe the compile-it-yourself approach but an installation into a standard directory structure. So what I'd like to have is a script (.bat or maybe Powershell) that works similar to the macosx-setup.sh script: - Contain a list of packages and their versions - Download missing packages - Download missing tools - Install not-yet-installed packages (includes, libs) into a standard directory structure Feedback, ideas, details anyone? Sounds good to me. I like Graham's suggestion of using Chocolatey/Nuget since they're currently the best option for package management under Windows. I'd be willing to convert our current Windows libraries to Nuget packages, and have them conform to Coapp's directory layout[1]. If we could find or create Chocolatey packages for Bison and Flex that would go a long way toward dropping the requirement for Cygwin. [1] The end goal being that someone else take over maintenance of the packages. Some men dream of the heavens. I dream of no longer having to create third-party Windows development libraries. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe:
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
Re: creating/using a standard package directory structure on Windows It sounds like you're suggesting that we take the packages as distribited and move things around to a standard structure. This sounds to me like the effort to do this it might be crazy-making ... Also: A few questions/comments: see inline: 1) zlib is installed as source only As opposed to installing DLL's from a package ? My understanding is that we need to build the zlib DLL ourselves due to ensure that the right C runtime is used. (cross C-runtime memory allocation issues). 2) portaudio is installed as source only (As in 1) above ?) 3) Every package is installed into its own subdirectory, sometimes with its own structure 4) glib2 contains zlib headers that break windows builds right: it appears that the gtk2/includes dir is never used as an include dir so that (fortunately) the correct zlib includes are used. Ditto for the zlib DLL. (It seems that the zlib DLL includes distribdted with our current GTK/GLib package are for zlib v1.27 while we're actually building/using zlib v1.25) In any case, as noted, we need to build our own ... 5) glib3 contains zlib headers that break windows builds ditto 6) krb5 contains includes that export krb5-build internal flags and thus cause warnings during compiles When building how ? ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
On 12/5/2013 3:02 PM, Bill Meier wrote: I like Gerald's answers much better than mine :) ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
2013/12/5 Gerald Combs ger...@wireshark.org 10) The setup process does not allow for the simultanous installation of gtk2 and gtk3 Does GTK3 work well enough on Windows to drop GTK2? This would simplify things quite a bit. Personally I find the GTK2 GUI much more polished than GTK3 on Windows (maybe just a matter of taste...). Regards, Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
+1 -Original Message- From: Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com To: Developer support list for Wireshark wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Sent: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 3:33 pm Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required Personally I find the GTK2 GUI much more polished than GTK3 on Windows (maybe just a matter of taste...). Regards, Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
mmann78@... writes: +1 -Original Message- From: Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com To: Developer support list for Wireshark wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Sent: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 3:33 pm Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required Personally I find the GTK2 GUI much more polished than GTK3 on Windows (maybe just a matter of taste...). Regards, Pascal. +2 I find GTK3 hideous on Windows. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
2013/12/5 Christopher Maynard christopher.mayn...@gtech.com mmann78@... writes: +1 -Original Message- From: Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com To: Developer support list for Wireshark wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Sent: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 3:33 pm Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required Personally I find the GTK2 GUI much more polished than GTK3 on Windows (maybe just a matter of taste...). Regards, Pascal. +2 I find GTK3 hideous on Windows. I'm happy to see that I'm not alone :) As the idea is to avoid spending much effort in GTK UI, and unless someone knows how to easily fix this ugliness (template missing?), what about switching back to GTK2? :p Pascal. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
On 5 December 2013 21:06, Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/12/5 Christopher Maynard christopher.mayn...@gtech.com mmann78@... writes: +1 -Original Message- From: Pascal Quantin pascal.quan...@gmail.com To: Developer support list for Wireshark wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Sent: Thu, Dec 5, 2013 3:33 pm Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required Personally I find the GTK2 GUI much more polished than GTK3 on Windows (maybe just a matter of taste...). Regards, Pascal. +2 I find GTK3 hideous on Windows. I'm happy to see that I'm not alone :) As the idea is to avoid spending much effort in GTK UI, and unless someone knows how to easily fix this ugliness (template missing?), what about switching back to GTK2? :p The GTK3 haters thread is over there -- ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
On 5 December 2013 19:59, Gerald Combs ger...@wireshark.org wrote: On 12/4/13 12:27 PM, Joerg Mayer wrote: Hello, as Graham and I are working on getting the Windows build process to a) work at all and b) be on par with the current nmake build process we currently rely on the setup infrastructure of the nmake build. I really don't like porting the nmake -f Makefile.nmake setup to cmake. Not because it is hard to do but because the current setup has various shortcomings 1) zlib is installed as source only 2) portaudio is installed as source only I know there are historical reasons for this but are they still valid? Zlib packages are available from the OpenSUSE Build Service (linked against msvcrt.dll) and Nuget (linked against multiple runtimes). Portaudio is also available from OBS. I could try them out. 3) Every package is installed into its own subdirectory, sometimes with its own structure CoApp has a standardized directory layout for libraries and include files called Pivots: http://coapp.org/reference/autopackage-ref.html#Pivots Pivot is a nicer name than deep explodey directory tree but it seems sensible and worth adopting IMHO. I still haven't looked into CoApp. How does it play with Chocolatey? 4) glib2 contains zlib headers that break windows builds 5) glib3 contains zlib headers that break windows builds This should be reported as a bug at https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/windows:mingw:win64/mingw64-zlib I'm sure patches are welcome. I shall try to do this. 6) krb5 contains includes that export krb5-build internal flags and thus cause warnings during compiles Is there a better library we can use for Kerberos? MIT, Secure Endpoints, and Heimdal all seem to provide packages that almost-but-not-quite meet our needs. I tried cross-compiling MIT Kerberos and Heimdal using MingW in the past but didn't have much luck. 6) Except for gtk3 no packages provide compile (includes, cflags) or linking (libs, ldflags) information. 7) glib3 contains pkg-config files, but they contain a wrong paths and unuseable compiler (gcc) flags The existence of the .pc files depends on my packaging scripts and the OBS .spec files for OBS-sourced packages. Adding them shouldn't be too difficult. The tricky part is getting them to point to the correct location on Windows. I'm not sure if we can use or modify the stock .pc files or if we'd have to create our own. My experiments with pkg-config from the gtk2 bundle and from pkg-configlite and the gtk3 bundle .pc files shows that it just works. The bundle .pc files have odd *nixy type paths in them but pkg-config and CMake sort all that out (with my modified FindGTK3.cmake) 8) The current setup process does not install QT I've been hesitant to switch this on since it's such a large download and I'm not sure which Qt should be installed. The Qt project provides official 32- and 64-bit installers for VS 2012 and a 32-bit installer for VS 2010. We provide 32- and 64-bit packages for VS 2010. We sign the EXEs and DLLs in our packages but the Qt project doesn't. I don't know if anyone provides VS 2013 packages. Folks only have to download it as often as it changes! Or is the issue server resources? 9) To build qtshark without wireshark still requires the installation of gtk2 or gtk3 for glib, gmodule, gthread I think we should switch from the separate wireshark-gtk2 and wireshark-qt-release directories to a common deployment directory, e.g. wireshark-deploy or wireshark-stage. This would presumably help to unify our build targets. Ack (I'd also like to get rid of ui/qt/QtShark.pro at some point in favor of CMake. Qt Creator supports CMake projects well enough, and having to maintain QtShark.pro for different platforms is a pain.) 10) The setup process does not allow for the simultanous installation of gtk2 and gtk3 Does GTK3 work well enough on Windows to drop GTK2? This would simplify things quite a bit. It's OK for me but there are some folks complaining about it from the cheap seats :-) 11) The installation of some build tools (python, cmake, cygwin-stuff like cat, bash) might be automated - depending on the setup script language maybe not all of them. So maybe something more similar to the macosx setup is wanted. Not maybe the compile-it-yourself approach but an installation into a standard directory structure. So what I'd like to have is a script (.bat or maybe Powershell) that works similar to the macosx-setup.sh script: - Contain a list of packages and their versions - Download missing packages - Download missing tools - Install not-yet-installed packages (includes, libs) into a standard directory structure Feedback, ideas, details anyone? Sounds good to me. I like Graham's suggestion of using Chocolatey/Nuget since they're currently the best option for package management
Re: [Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
Before replying to some of the points, I want to clarify something: This is about problems I have encountered in a current setup (no old libs package, current source, clean out of tree setup and build). Also, when I mentioned setup-macosx.sh I didn't take into account that some people who are not interested in OS X may not know what it does (or at least not all the details): - At the beginning it has a section that defines the package versions (similar to config.nmake but only once, as there is no need to differentiate between 32bit and 64bit). - These source(!) packages are downloaded, unpacked, patches from the Wireshark sources (macosx-support-lib-patches/) are applied if necessary, they are compiled and then installed into a common tree. On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 10:20:58PM +, Graham Bloice wrote: On 5 December 2013 19:59, Gerald Combs ger...@wireshark.org wrote: On 12/4/13 12:27 PM, Joerg Mayer wrote: as Graham and I are working on getting the Windows build process to a) work at all and b) be on par with the current nmake build process we currently rely on the setup infrastructure of the nmake build. I really don't like porting the nmake -f Makefile.nmake setup to cmake. Not because it is hard to do but because the current setup has various shortcomings 1) zlib is installed as source only 2) portaudio is installed as source only I know there are historical reasons for this but are they still valid? Zlib packages are available from the OpenSUSE Build Service (linked against msvcrt.dll) and Nuget (linked against multiple runtimes). Portaudio is also available from OBS. My complaint is a different one: Why don't we compile these two packages at setup time? At least for zlib it seems simple enough if you have cmake installed (see README.cmake). I could try them out. 3) Every package is installed into its own subdirectory, sometimes with its own structure CoApp has a standardized directory layout for libraries and include files called Pivots: http://coapp.org/reference/autopackage-ref.html#Pivots Pivot is a nicer name than deep explodey directory tree but it seems sensible and worth adopting IMHO. I still haven't looked into CoApp. How does it play with Chocolatey? I have no problem with individual install dirs for each package and arch, as long as all packages follow the same schema. 4) glib2 contains zlib headers that break windows builds 5) glib3 contains zlib headers that break windows builds This should be reported as a bug at https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/windows:mingw:win64/mingw64-zlib I'm sure patches are welcome. I shall try to do this. My complaint is not about these problems but about the fact that the install process doesn't fix it. Because of this we have to work around it in the toplevel CMakeLists.txt 6) krb5 contains includes that export krb5-build internal flags and thus cause warnings during compiles Is there a better library we can use for Kerberos? MIT, Secure Endpoints, and Heimdal all seem to provide packages that almost-but-not-quite meet our needs. I tried cross-compiling MIT Kerberos and Heimdal using MingW in the past but didn't have much luck. My complaint is not about these problems but about the fact that the install process doesn't fix it - instead we work around this in the source (packet-kerberos.c) 6) Except for gtk3 no packages provide compile (includes, cflags) or linking (libs, ldflags) information. 7) glib3 contains pkg-config files, but they contain a wrong paths and unuseable compiler (gcc) flags The existence of the .pc files depends on my packaging scripts and the OBS .spec files for OBS-sourced packages. Adding them shouldn't be too difficult. The tricky part is getting them to point to the correct location on Windows. I'm not sure if we can use or modify the stock .pc files or if we'd have to create our own. My experiments with pkg-config from the gtk2 bundle and from pkg-configlite and the gtk3 bundle .pc files shows that it just works. The bundle .pc files have odd *nixy type paths in them but pkg-config and CMake sort all that out (with my modified FindGTK3.cmake) And with the version number I could now identify that ancient ;-) install and reproduce it. They probably do something similar to what I do in cmake. I'Ve checked in a fix to no longer convert windows paths. 8) The current setup process does not install QT I've been hesitant to switch this on since it's such a large download and I'm not sure which Qt should be installed. The Qt project provides official 32- and 64-bit installers for VS 2012 and a 32-bit installer for VS 2010. We provide 32- and 64-bit packages for VS 2010. We sign the EXEs and DLLs in our packages but the Qt project doesn't. I don't know if anyone provides VS 2013 packages. Folks only have to download it as often as it changes!
[Wireshark-dev] Windows build setup - Concept required
Hello, as Graham and I are working on getting the Windows build process to a) work at all and b) be on par with the current nmake build process we currently rely on the setup infrastructure of the nmake build. I really don't like porting the nmake -f Makefile.nmake setup to cmake. Not because it is hard to do but because the current setup has various shortcomings 1) zlib is installed as source only 2) portaudio is installed as source only 3) Every package is installed into its own subdirectory, sometimes with its own structure 4) glib2 contains zlib headers that break windows builds 5) glib3 contains zlib headers that break windows builds 6) krb5 contains includes that export krb5-build internal flags and thus cause warnings during compiles 6) Except for gtk3 no packages provide compile (includes, cflags) or linking (libs, ldflags) information. 7) glib3 contains pkg-config files, but they contain a wrong paths and unuseable compiler (gcc) flags 8) The current setup process does not install QT 9) To build qtshark without wireshark still requires the installation of gtk2 or gtk3 for glib, gmodule, gthread 10) The setup process does not allow for the simultanous installation of gtk2 and gtk3 11) The installation of some build tools (python, cmake, cygwin-stuff like cat, bash) might be automated - depending on the setup script language maybe not all of them. So maybe something more similar to the macosx setup is wanted. Not maybe the compile-it-yourself approach but an installation into a standard directory structure. So what I'd like to have is a script (.bat or maybe Powershell) that works similar to the macosx-setup.sh script: - Contain a list of packages and their versions - Download missing packages - Download missing tools - Install not-yet-installed packages (includes, libs) into a standard directory structure Feedback, ideas, details anyone? Thanks Jörg -- Joerg Mayer jma...@loplof.de We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology. ___ Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list wireshark-dev@wireshark.org Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
