Re: cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-17 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 03:46:45AM -0400, Jean-Sebastien Trottier wrote: >I like the third option... I'm not going to use gdb as much as Chris >so I think he is in a better position to maintain it. > >However, I agree to take care of cutting the first stable gdb + >"Cygwin, W11" Tcl/Tk version. >

Re: Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-16 Thread Jean-Sebastien Trottier
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:02:32PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: > Jean-Sebastien Trottier wrote: > > >I would say that what we already have is: > >Tcl/Tk: half-Windows/half-Cygwin, GDI > > Err...ok. If by this you mean > > tcl: cygwin (no GUI), but it doesn't do cygwin paths correctly in

Re: Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-15 Thread Charles Wilson
Jean-Sebastien Trottier wrote: I would say that what we already have is: Tcl/Tk: half-Windows/half-Cygwin, GDI Err...ok. If by this you mean tcl: cygwin (no GUI), but it doesn't do cygwin paths correctly in all cases tk: cygwin, X11 As you can see above, the current Tcl version uses win

Re: Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-15 Thread Jean-Sebastien Trottier
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 01:35:16PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: > In the interests of clarity, let's agree on some terminology: > > a "cygwin" version -- > uses the cygwin1.dll for runtime services (like printf etc) > > a "native windows" version > uses msvcrt.dll for runtime services > > an

Re: Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-15 Thread Brian Gallew
Charles Wilson wrote: The real bone of contention is "tk" and "itk" alone. How can we have a cygwin-X tk and a cygwin-GDI tk on the same machine. Hopefully in *exactly* the same way that I can run XEmacs either with or without X up and running.

Re: Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-15 Thread Igor Pechtchanski
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Charles Wilson wrote: > In the interests of clarity, let's agree on some terminology: > > a "cygwin" version -- > uses the cygwin1.dll for runtime services (like printf etc) > > a "native windows" version > uses msvcrt.dll for runtime services > > an "X" version > uses x

Re: Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-15 Thread Charles Wilson
Charles Wilson wrote: Using these terms, what we already have is cygwin, GDI ActiveState provides a native, GDI What is being proposed is cygwin, X Note that tcl and itcl do not, themselves, do any display-oriented processing. So GDI vs. X is meaningless for them. They could be released i

Cygwin, tcl/tk, and "native" [Was: Re: Interest in "native" Tcl/Tk/Expect/Itcl/... packages?]

2004-10-15 Thread Charles Wilson
In the interests of clarity, let's agree on some terminology: a "cygwin" version -- uses the cygwin1.dll for runtime services (like printf etc) a "native windows" version uses msvcrt.dll for runtime services an "X" version uses xlib calls to draw stuff on a display this requires a xserver o