Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/06/2016 09:27 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: I'm sorry for that. One of my biggest flaws in human relations is detecting when someone is being ironic, sarcastic, or is just joking around, and when they are being serious. I would think both list would be interested in knowing what is

Re[5]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

I'm sorry for that. One of my biggest flaws in human relations is detecting when someone is being ironic, sarcastic, or is just joking around, and when they are being serious. I would think both list would be interested in knowing what is required of their projects by the lawyers at GTK. This is

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/06/2016 07:01 PM, Lucas Levrel wrote: > Le 5 mai 2016, Andrew Robinson a écrit : >> 1) Because there are between 40 to 120Mb worth of libraries or their >> dependencies I would have to post on my website. > > It's not clear to me whether one has to distribute GTK if it's linked >

Re[4]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

OK. I understand your mileage is very different from mine. Remember, I'm just a GTK user (this is GTK *app devel* list, not GTK devel list). Just a few remarks before I answer your other mail: Le 5 mai 2016, Andrew Robinson a écrit : 1) Because there are between 40 to 120Mb worth of libraries

Re[2]: Re[4]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

That's weird! I've never heard of a Linux distribution that also has precompiled packages for Win32. I will check it out at my earliest convenience. You mentioned GTK2, but I am hoping it also has (or has switched over to) GTK3. I hope this isn't too good to be true. I will be too busy to check

Re: Re[4]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Note that if you are using fedora (and possibly other Linux distributions) it comes with lots of win32 packages precompiled. E.g. all you need to do to get gtk2 and its dependencies is to do: dnf install mingw32-gtk2 You can then compile your gtk programs for windows through cross compilation

Re[4]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 5/5/2016 at 10:23 AM, Lucas Levrel wrote: >Le 5 mai 2016, Andrew Robinson a écrit : > >> So if I don't want to make my on copy of the GTK+ libraries, > >Why wouldn't you want to build your static libs for future inclusion in >your software? Where "build" is for "let the

Re[3]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Le 5 mai 2016, Andrew Robinson a écrit : Actually, MXE isn't a compiler, but a Makefile that compiles a cross compiler. OK. So if I don't want to make my on copy of the GTK+ libraries, Why wouldn't you want to build your static libs for future inclusion in your software? Where "build" is

Re[3]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Actually, MXE isn't a compiler, but a Makefile that compiles a cross compiler. So if I don't want to make my on copy of the GTK+ libraries, I must tell grandma and grandpa to get their own copy of MSYS2 and MXE, and provide make their own copy of GTK+ for Win32. Wouldn't that be easy and fun? On

Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Le 3 mai 2016, Andrew Robinson a écrit : Is it really necessary for every Windows application bundle to ship its own copy of GTK+? By default MXE links statically. So you don't have any dll to bundle with your app. In such circumstances, what does LGPL say? Do you still have to provide the

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Try this package: $ pacman -Ss mingw-w64-i686-gtk3 mingw32/mingw-w64-i686-gtk3 3.18.6-1 [installed] GObject-based multi-platform GUI toolkit (v3) (mingw-w64) On 5/4/2016 3:51 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > Yeah, I see that, but that only downloads 64-bit binaries. I need the Win-32 >

Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Yeah, I see that, but that only downloads 64-bit binaries. I need the Win-32 binaries. On 5/4/2016 at 12:20 PM, Florian Pelz wrote: >On 05/04/2016 03:59 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: >> No, there are no Win32 binaries in MSYS2. Where are you getting your >> information?

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/04/2016 03:59 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > No, there are no Win32 binaries in MSYS2. Where are you getting your > information? > MSYS2 contains pacman. `pacman -Syu mingw-w64-x86_64-gtk3` downloads GTK+ binaries for x86_64 and puts them in the C:\msys64\mingw64 directory (by default). This

Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

No, there are no Win32 binaries in MSYS2. Where are you getting your information? On 5/4/2016 at 12:29 AM, Florian Pelz wrote: >On 05/04/2016 02:22 AM, Andrew Robinson wrote: >> I have an idea! Why doesn't someone just compile all the binaries for Win32 >> and Win64

Re[3]: Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 5/3/2016 at 5:42 PM, Allin Cottrell wrote: >On Tue, 3 May 2016, Andrew Robinson wrote: > >> I have never seen a cross-compiled version of Fedora. Is it related to the >> mythical Chimera? > >Read for comprehension. Fedora is strictly Linux (of course), but >offers a set of

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/04/2016 02:22 AM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > I have an idea! Why doesn't someone just compile all the binaries for Win32 > and Win64 and make them available on the Internet, that way none of us will > have to go through all this stupid BS just to get some binaries? Just two > packages, one for

Re[2]: Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On Tue, 3 May 2016, Andrew Robinson wrote: I have never seen a cross-compiled version of Fedora. Is it related to the mythical Chimera? Read for comprehension. Fedora is strictly Linux (of course), but offers a set of packages that enable you to cross-compile with ease for MS Windows.

Re[2]: Re[2]: Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

I just found the link to MSVC 2013 on Microsoft's site. Visual Studio is not free, Visual Studio Express or Community is free. It will still require me to uninstall my current version of MSVC in order to run this older version, because different versions of MSVC on the same computer do not play

Re: Re[2]: Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > The website, https://github.com/wingtk/gtk-win32, looks really good at > first > glance, until you read the fine print where it says, "Any version of VS > apart > from 2013 is not supported". What if I don't have VS

Re[2]: Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

There are many ways to have good gtk3 binaries for Windows: - if you are using mingw you can fetch updated gtk3 binaries from msys2 (https://github.com/Alexpux/MSYS2-packages) - if you are cross compling Fedora and other distros provide mingw binaries - if you are using MSVC, there are no

Re: Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > Been there, done that. The latest version of GTK+ that GNOME has is 2.24, > i.e. > -- there are no 3.x binaries. > > There are many ways to have good gtk3 binaries for Windows: - if you are using mingw you can fetch

Re[2]: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 5/3/2016 at 11:34 AM, Dov Grobgeld wrote: >Another equivalent scons-based way of compiling for windows with gcc is >shown in my program giv. > >See: https://github.com/dov/giv/blob/master/SConstruct > >SCons uses the Sconstruct files to do the cross-compilation and also

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/03/2016 08:34 PM, Dov Grobgeld wrote: > The complete gtk run time is only about 20MB in size (at least for gtk2) > which with todays hard disk sizes really is negligable, so I agree that > there is no reason to try to create a common gtk runtime. > > I still remember the frustration back in

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Another equivalent scons-based way of compiling for windows with gcc is shown in my program giv. See: https://github.com/dov/giv/blob/master/SConstruct SCons uses the Sconstruct files to do the cross-compilation and also calls out to nsis to create a windows installer. The complete gtk run time

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On Tue, 3 May 2016, Dave Howorth wrote: On 2016-05-03 16:57, Florian Pelz wrote: I'd like to have one standard GTK+ installer for the GTK+ DLLs etc. that can be downloaded and installed from other installers, so there is just one GTK+ installed on Windows instead of one copy of perhaps

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/03/2016 06:12 PM, Dave Howorth wrote: > On 2016-05-03 16:57, Florian Pelz wrote: >> I'd like to have one standard GTK+ installer for the GTK+ DLLs etc. that >> can be downloaded and installed from other installers, so there is just >> one GTK+ installed on Windows instead of one copy of

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 2016-05-03 16:57, Florian Pelz wrote: I'd like to have one standard GTK+ installer for the GTK+ DLLs etc. that can be downloaded and installed from other installers, so there is just one GTK+ installed on Windows instead of one copy of perhaps different versions of GTK+ for each application.

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/03/2016 04:57 PM, Andrew Robinson wrote: > Well I can't ship MSYS2 and MXE with my application, and I most certainly > can't sell any application to grandma and grandpa, if it requires instructions > on how to install MSYS2 and MXE just so you can run my application. > For MSYS2, you

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Le 2 mai 2016, Florian Pelz a écrit : On 05/02/2016 12:36 PM, Lucas Levrel wrote: Then I found MinGW Cross Env, now called MXE (http://mxe.cc/). It compiled my project with no effort at all. This is interesting. May I hijack this thread? I did not know about MXE. What is their relationship

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

Thank you Lucas, for submitting this post. MXE seems very interesting and I feel compelled to do some more research into it. On 5/2/2016 at 3:36 AM, Lucas Levrel wrote: >(copy to OP in case he's already unsubscribed, apologies for duplication >if he's not) > >Le 30 avril 2016,

Re: Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

On 05/02/2016 12:36 PM, Lucas Levrel wrote: > […] > > I'm not an expert programmer and when I wanted to compile for Windows > the software I developped in Linux, I couldn't achieve a satisfactory > result (using the -mwin32 or -mwindows flag gave either a clumsy > additional command window, or

Compiling for Windows [Was: argv revisited]

(copy to OP in case he's already unsubscribed, apologies for duplication if he's not) Le 30 avril 2016, Andrew Robinson a écrit : Now my new problem I had was either locating a Win32 version of GTK+ greater than v3.18 or locating a version of libglib.dll greater than v2.40. It isn't going to