|
|
Home » Developing U++ » Releasing U++ » Releasing in Win32 xp
Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16058] |
Mon, 26 May 2008 10:57 ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
|
Hi! I compiled Ultimate++ release 805.r120 with MSC8 optimal on win32 xp sp3 was builded without errors.
I downloaded MakeInstall3 from uppbox repository from uvs. I Tried to make package with builded MakeInstall3 but have errors. Tell me please... where i can get more info about this! I analyzing the code for understand mechanism... but this is not sufficient for understand!
It will be great for new users to download builded release installers and test this!
Thank you.
With respect John.
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16059 is a reply to message #16058] |
Mon, 26 May 2008 11:07 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
|
Do you want MakeInstall3 to be used as a universal installer? It was developed to create win32 releases of ulitmate++. And it needs 7zip and WinInstall3 (also in uppbox) apps.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16063 is a reply to message #16062] |
Mon, 26 May 2008 20:29 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
|
Looks like we have another maintainer If you'd like to prepare regular svn builds please do - we need it. I am unfortunately not able to do it. I could then make only main releases (with changelog, updated libs etc). And I think these svn builds should be located together with linux builds on ultimate server. And please tell what changes you made to makeinstall3, I could merge them with current sources if necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16071 is a reply to message #16068] |
Tue, 27 May 2008 07:54 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
mdelfede
Messages: 1307 Registered: September 2007
|
Ultimate Contributor |
|
|
luzr wrote on Tue, 27 May 2008 00:18 |
bytefield wrote on Mon, 26 May 2008 14:59 | Well, the build is near linux builds on ultimate server. The problem is if should be there both version of builds, with and without mingw? I've uploaded only the version without mingw, guess who use svn builds have already installed mingw or a MS compiler.
Andrei
|
I vote for releasing with mingw too.
In fact, I think current "svn" version is more stable than "official" 2007.1 (occassional blunder excluded).
And, more importantly, releasing with mingw allows also testing of the "complete" distribution. I mean, it puts all versions of release under testing. That is very useful...
Mirek
|
Maybe he meant if he should include mingw on release (which makes it quite big file to download) or without it, not if he should release both mingw and MS compiled versions.
IMHO for svn builds would make more sense to separate mingw (which doesn't change) from upp. Or, maybe, to make the installer automatically download mingw if needed.
Max
|
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16073 is a reply to message #16071] |
Tue, 27 May 2008 08:05 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
|
mdelfede wrote on Tue, 27 May 2008 08:54 |
luzr wrote on Tue, 27 May 2008 00:18 |
bytefield wrote on Mon, 26 May 2008 14:59 | Well, the build is near linux builds on ultimate server. The problem is if should be there both version of builds, with and without mingw? I've uploaded only the version without mingw, guess who use svn builds have already installed mingw or a MS compiler.
Andrei
|
I vote for releasing with mingw too.
In fact, I think current "svn" version is more stable than "official" 2007.1 (occassional blunder excluded).
And, more importantly, releasing with mingw allows also testing of the "complete" distribution. I mean, it puts all versions of release under testing. That is very useful...
Mirek
|
Maybe he meant if he should include mingw on release (which makes it quite big file to download) or without it, not if he should release both mingw and MS compiled versions.
IMHO for svn builds would make more sense to separate mingw (which doesn't change) from upp. Or, maybe, to make the installer automatically download mingw if needed.
Max
|
I vote for make separate release for mingw wich will changes and build settings of u++, the release we can name mingw-for-upp.
[Updated on: Mon, 23 June 2008 14:50] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16075 is a reply to message #16071] |
Tue, 27 May 2008 09:34 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
bytefield
Messages: 210 Registered: December 2007
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
mdelfede wrote on Tue, 27 May 2008 08:54 |
luzr wrote on Tue, 27 May 2008 00:18 |
bytefield wrote on Mon, 26 May 2008 14:59 | Well, the build is near linux builds on ultimate server. The problem is if should be there both version of builds, with and without mingw? I've uploaded only the version without mingw, guess who use svn builds have already installed mingw or a MS compiler.
Andrei
|
I vote for releasing with mingw too.
In fact, I think current "svn" version is more stable than "official" 2007.1 (occassional blunder excluded).
And, more importantly, releasing with mingw allows also testing of the "complete" distribution. I mean, it puts all versions of release under testing. That is very useful...
Mirek
|
Maybe he meant if he should include mingw on release (which makes it quite big file to download) or without it, not if he should release both mingw and MS compiled versions.
IMHO for svn builds would make more sense to separate mingw (which doesn't change) from upp. Or, maybe, to make the installer automatically download mingw if needed.
Max
|
That i was thinking, i wasn't wanted to include mingw with every package, it make no sens, better have mingw as a separate package or make the installer to download and install it if needed. It isn't so hard to modify the installer to download current mingw version, or to specify to user that one compiler have to be installed on system.
cdabbd745f1234c2751ee1f932d1dd75
|
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16077 is a reply to message #16076] |
Tue, 27 May 2008 10:18 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
mdelfede
Messages: 1307 Registered: September 2007
|
Ultimate Contributor |
|
|
mr_ped wrote on Tue, 27 May 2008 10:09 | What's wrong with current 2 exe download? You either take the one without mingw, or the one with.
|
well, the wrong could be the unneeded server space occupied by build, the time spent to package 2 executables and to upload them on server.
Quote: |
Installer may be not able to download anything (what if the target computer is offline?) and the U++ has been providing both installers since start I think.
|
I agree to that one for releases builds, not for svn ones.
People that get svn builds usually have already an installed upp with mingw or, in the rare cases they don't they can fetch the mingw separately.
SVN builds, even if they're quite stable, should be used for testing purposes by people that already knows something about upp, and have a stable version installed.
BTW, I think the best stuff would be to provide theide with some way to check for an available mingw version and (optionally) update local version if older.
OR, it's possible to put a mingw-only installer on site and modify php script to allow people to download it if needed.
That would spare server space and upload time for mantainer.
Ciao
Max
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16078 is a reply to message #16077] |
Tue, 27 May 2008 10:43 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
|
Quote: | That would spare server space and upload time for mantainer.
|
I propose to keep on the server builds from last month only.
Of course this not solve upload time, but is this really a problem ?
The best would be of course if theide have some kind of plugin window in which user could select mingw (others compilers?) and libraries that can't be keep as part of upp sources (like SDL). Sources should be able to be updated via SVN (if it will be integrated with theide).
|
|
|
|
Re: Releasing in Win32 xp [message #16082 is a reply to message #16080] |
Tue, 27 May 2008 12:08 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](theme/default/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to next message](theme/default/images/down.png) |
|
Quote: |
I usually leave on server just latest 3-4 svn builds, just in case that a new one breaks something. One month would be about 15 svn times 3 (or 4) releases, too much for currente server's free space ![Smile](images/smiley_icons/icon_smile.gif)
Maybe 3-4 is a bit few (a bug could remain hidden for some days...) but at least that one will enforce bug reporting ![Smile](images/smiley_icons/icon_smile.gif)
|
I think Mirek could change the limit a bit Mirek could you tell what server limits are set now ?
Quote: |
I agree with that one, it could be an interesting addition.
BTW, I'm (slowly) coding an SVN class to integrate it on theide.... slowly because of lack of time on those days.
When the class will be ready for some tests (now it does just a checkin/commit) I'll post it on bazaar.
I think I'll need then some help do integrate with theide and, that would be really useful, someone that can write a visual diff/patch plugin for it.
More on tecnology lab... I guess that one is the right place!
|
My wish is to make TheIDE to be able to cooperate with any VCS, but this needs to make ide architecture more "pluginable". Please work on SVN, I'm working on GIT. In the end we could compare our experiences to know what ide needs to be able to handle both vcs properly. As for visual diff, we could take one from uvs2. It's not perfect but it's quite ok. Frankly it could be separated as package and extended in future (for example visual conflicts solving is missing now)
[Updated on: Tue, 27 May 2008 12:09] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Mar 28 23:51:45 CET 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01402 seconds
|
|
|