Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » Releasing U++ » Full install package for Windows
Full install package for Windows [message #27629] Mon, 26 July 2010 23:38 Go to next message
koldo is currently offline  koldo
Messages: 3372
Registered: August 2008
Senior Veteran
Hello all

I think it would be interesting to have an install .exe file for Windows including all necessary items to compile all examples including in addition to actual .exe:

- MinGW 4.4.0 or better
- SDL

Just to install and compile it all Smile.

What is your opinion?

I think if we want it, we can convince Mirek to do it.

If it would be useful, I have prepared some changes to MakeInstall4 and WinInstaller2 to include additional files. It is very easy.

It is only about 12 Mb of additional space but, I think it is worthwhile mainly for newbies that require to run it all just out of the box.


Best regards
Iñaki
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #27631 is a reply to message #27629] Tue, 27 July 2010 07:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jerson is currently offline  jerson
Messages: 202
Registered: June 2010
Location: Bombay, India
Experienced Member

I think it will be very useful especially for new users. Saves a lot of trouble identifying things that don't work and also allows the new user to see what can be achieved in UPP.

Good idea.
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #27633 is a reply to message #27629] Tue, 27 July 2010 09:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mr_ped is currently offline  mr_ped
Messages: 825
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha
Experienced Contributor
My opinion is "yes", I did always like the old way of mingw bundled windows versions. I think it's not important to release every version in such way, if it takes too much time to prepare it, but at least every 6 months or so...
(anyway, I don't care too much, as normally I'm now under linux, so for me the good support for .deb is more important, and dolik did great job with that)
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #27634 is a reply to message #27629] Tue, 27 July 2010 10:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dolik.rce is currently offline  dolik.rce
Messages: 1789
Registered: August 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Ultimate Contributor

I vote yes too Smile It really helped me to start with U++ when I first found it.

Also, it should be actually not that hard to achieve, as it was already done before, so we can continue where mingw builds were dropped.

Honza
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #27640 is a reply to message #27629] Tue, 27 July 2010 12:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
tojocky is currently offline  tojocky
Messages: 607
Registered: April 2008
Location: UK
Contributor

The amazing of the full install is that you do not need to install other packages(mingw, sdl) for first test! It makes life easy!

YES!
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #27644 is a reply to message #27640] Tue, 27 July 2010 16:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
koldo is currently offline  koldo
Messages: 3372
Registered: August 2008
Senior Veteran
Just to underline that we have here http://sourceforge.net/projects/upp/files/upp/1517/mingw_4_4 _0.7z/download a MinGW 4.4.0 10 Mb package that works well with U++ multitasking.

This can be used to maintain full installable complete, but as small as possible.


Best regards
Iñaki
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #28604 is a reply to message #27644] Wed, 08 September 2010 10:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
281264 is currently offline  281264
Messages: 270
Registered: June 2010
Location: Spain
Experienced Member
Excellent notion!; by all means I endorse it.

Javier
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #28795 is a reply to message #28604] Fri, 17 September 2010 09:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rishi is currently offline  Rishi
Messages: 39
Registered: August 2010
Location: Trincomalee, Sri Lanka
Member
I say no Sad . Use LLVM + OGRE + Allegro + OpenSL + Mesa3D instead because they are pure permissive and uncontaminated by GPL.
But this make the upp very big for nearly half-a-GB. Very Happy

[Updated on: Fri, 17 September 2010 09:25]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Full install package for Windows [message #28796 is a reply to message #28795] Fri, 17 September 2010 09:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
koldo is currently offline  koldo
Messages: 3372
Registered: August 2008
Senior Veteran
Rishi wrote on Fri, 17 September 2010 09:24

I say no Sad . Use LLVM + OGRE + Allegro + OpenSL + Mesa3D instead because they are pure permissive and uncontaminated by GPL.
But this make the upp very big for nearly half-a-GB. Very Happy

Hello Rishi

There is no problem as the proposal is to have two installers in Windows: one the actual and other the full.


Best regards
Iñaki
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #28805 is a reply to message #28796] Fri, 17 September 2010 14:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Rishi is currently offline  Rishi
Messages: 39
Registered: August 2010
Location: Trincomalee, Sri Lanka
Member
But the combination I mentioned is full-permissive and they never tried for SUCK licensing like GPL. We can 'trust' the combination. Anyway, there needs to be a package manager for easy installation and a 'template manager' for templates to create projects easily and duplicate them. (like stupid devpacks, dev-c++ authors had been trying to develop devpacks instead of the dev-cpp IDE. Thats why it fell down underground.)
Important packages:
Please pack the following in precompiled library form (*.lib, *.dll, *.so, *.a)
Please don't ask people to build it.
1.Anyone please compile boost for windows under MinGW -- it is too hard to compile
2.Mesa3d
3.OGRE
4.libcurl
5.OpenSL if possible or (OpenSL ES)
6.PortMIDI
7.Allegro
8.libxml
9.xlib
10.zlib
11.Efl or some toolkit

It is very difficult to open package configuration and edit list of libraries, so template manager helps us a lot.

SDL maintains a suck-licensing method, so avoid it. Sad
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #28814 is a reply to message #28805] Fri, 17 September 2010 22:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
koldo is currently offline  koldo
Messages: 3372
Registered: August 2008
Senior Veteran
Rishi wrote on Fri, 17 September 2010 14:10

But the combination I mentioned is full-permissive and they never tried for SUCK licensing like GPL. We can 'trust' the combination. Anyway, there needs to be a package manager for easy installation and a 'template manager' for templates to create projects easily and duplicate them. (like stupid devpacks, dev-c++ authors had been trying to develop devpacks instead of the dev-cpp IDE. Thats why it fell down underground.)
Important packages:
Please pack the following in precompiled library form (*.lib, *.dll, *.so, *.a)
Please don't ask people to build it.
1.Anyone please compile boost for windows under MinGW -- it is too hard to compile
2.Mesa3d
3.OGRE
4.libcurl
5.OpenSL if possible or (OpenSL ES)
6.PortMIDI
7.Allegro
8.libxml
9.xlib
10.zlib
11.Efl or some toolkit

It is very difficult to open package configuration and edit list of libraries, so template manager helps us a lot.

SDL maintains a suck-licensing method, so avoid it. Sad

Hello Rishi

A lot of work to do Smile. If you know them well you can help by doing wrapper packages at least with the very basics (like GLCtrl Smile).

About SDL, its license requires for commercial programs to include it dynamically. In fact this is the preferred way to link this kind of packages by default, so it does not hurt me much Smile.

I am working a lot with SDL now. If you know any valid proposal with a more free license please post it.


Best regards
Iñaki
Re: Full install package for Windows [message #28832 is a reply to message #28814] Sun, 19 September 2010 07:35 Go to previous message
Rishi is currently offline  Rishi
Messages: 39
Registered: August 2010
Location: Trincomalee, Sri Lanka
Member
koldo wrote on Sat, 18 September 2010 02:10

Rishi wrote on Fri, 17 September 2010 14:10

But the combination I mentioned is full-permissive and they never tried for SUCK licensing like GPL. We can 'trust' the combination. Anyway, there needs to be a package manager for easy installation and a 'template manager' for templates to create projects easily and duplicate them. (like stupid devpacks, dev-c++ authors had been trying to develop devpacks instead of the dev-cpp IDE. Thats why it fell down underground.)
Important packages:
Please pack the following in precompiled library form (*.lib, *.dll, *.so, *.a)
Please don't ask people to build it.
1.Anyone please compile boost for windows under MinGW -- it is too hard to compile
2.Mesa3d
3.OGRE
4.libcurl
5.OpenSL if possible or (OpenSL ES)
6.PortMIDI
7.Allegro
8.libxml
9.xlib
10.zlib
11.Efl or some toolkit

It is very difficult to open package configuration and edit list of libraries, so template manager helps us a lot.

SDL maintains a suck-licensing method, so avoid it. Sad

Hello Rishi

A lot of work to do Smile. If you know them well you can help by doing wrapper packages at least with the very basics (like GLCtrl Smile).

About SDL, its license requires for commercial programs to include it dynamically. In fact this is the preferred way to link this kind of packages by default, so it does not hurt me much Smile.

I am working a lot with SDL now. If you know any valid proposal with a more free license please post it.


I don't have experience with Upp. I was wasting time in studying suck-licensed Gtk. Now I am studying OpenGL+OGRE+CEGUI.
Anyone please DO the above mentioned stuff!

I am busy on proposal to make things permissive: PAQ, harmony.
I don't visit Wikipedia because it is copyleft.[/strike]
Anyone interested, contact me.

[Updated on: Sun, 17 October 2010 14:36]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: GTK 2.21.3 changes includes paths
Next Topic: Stable releases interval
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Jun 16 16:36:48 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02348 seconds