Pike-devel August 2009

pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se

7 participants
24 discussions

Re: Time for beta
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 30 Aug '09

30 Aug '09

Judging by the contents of the ,v files, sdl-config.disabled,v should exist in Attic only, and sdl-config,v should not be in Attic...

2 3

Windows PDB:s
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 28 Aug '09

28 Aug '09

Does anyone remember what the problem with producing working PDBs from the Windows build was? I have a colleague with a Windows 7 crash that happens... sometimes. I'd like to send him a debug build so I don't have to decode an assembler trace. Has anyone tried since we switched to dll-modules?

6 27

Re: Time for beta
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 27 Aug '09

27 Aug '09

(In case it's the first date, using the date of the next commit minus one second should work, except in the cases where there are several commits the same second (this is only the case for synthesized commits I think, CVS was never that fast... :))

1 0

Re: More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 26 Aug '09

26 Aug '09

>Just read up more about compiling pike on windows. Seems it's quite hard, >even the basics. I wonder if this page is still current? > >http://www.gotpike.org/PikeWiki/index.pike?page=PikeDevel/Pike%20on%20Windo… It's a bit out of date. >It is quite confusing, I think. What is best used nowadays? The MinGW >approach had problems with dynamic modules. I don't know if that is still >the case, but if it is, does this mean you cannot write your own modules and >just use … [View More]

4 4

Re: More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS ＠ Pike developers forum 25 Aug '09

25 Aug '09

People have had some limited success with MinGW, and it's getting better all the time so I think that's the way to go for windows compilation. It "just" needs to sort out the remaining quirks and odds and ends, if I'm not mistaken. Personally I don't have any experience of that, though. The old method is admittedly exceedingly complex (and slow too). It has its roots in another era.. Once MinGW proves reliable it'll probably replace sprshd as the normal way of compilation, but unless MinGW can … [View More]

4 5

Re: More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum 25 Aug '09

25 Aug '09

>And what about this rnctl pike script I'd need? I cannot find that anywhere >in the source. Since Pike 7.1, the windows build tools have been moved out of the Pike main source tree and into one of its own. You can check it out with e.g. "svn co http://pike-svn.lysator.liu.se/Pike/nt-tools".

1 0

Re: More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 24 Aug '09

24 Aug '09

Well, it means someone knows how to compile it on Unix.

1 0

Re: More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 24 Aug '09

24 Aug '09

Right, which means it's own little configure hell on Windows. Is it planned to be included in the normal dist?

1 0

Re: More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Peter Bortas ＠ Pike developers forum 24 Aug '09

24 Aug '09

Is the DLL in question part of the standard GTK+ dist?

1 0

More questions about GTK2.SourceView
by Yvan Vander Sanden 24 Aug '09

24 Aug '09

Hi. I am still struggling with SourceView, on windows today. It seems the binary install for windows does not include it. Is there any specific reason for this? Since lots of other libraries are included in the binary, i don't see why gtksourceview is not. Thing is, if i want to make use of gtksourceview in my software, i force my (at the moment fictional) users to compile pike from source, instead of installing a binary. Which makes it much harder to use it. Or is there perhaps another way … [View More]

2 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Pike-devel August 2009