Hi,
does anyone care about the Windows GTK 2.6 builds?
As you might know, the geany-$version_nogtk_setup.exe and geany-$version_win32.zip files contain a geany.exe which is linked against GTK 2.6 libs whereas geany-$version_setup.exe (full installer) has a geany.exe which is linked against a recent GTK version which runtime part is also included in the installer.
I was just testing something and accidentally screw up my gtk2.6 and gtk2.12 folders (they got copied into each other, yay!). But it's a not real problem at all. But I'm anyway asking myself if it's necessary to provide all these three files or if it weren't enough to provide only GTK 2.12 builds: the full installer (everything included, ready to go) and the ZIP file only including Geany itself for fast downloads.
Yes, this will stop Win9x support where GTK 2.12 doesn't run.
I'm just a little sick of compiling Geany on Windows every time two time from scratch. This is necessary for the GTK major versions. Only GTK 2.6 would mean no printing support on Windows and some minor missing features. GTK 2.12 means no Windows 9x support.
Advantages: - I will have more time to code instead of building Windows stuff - less confusing download possibilities to Windows users
Disadvantages: - we loose Windows 9x users (if there are any)
Regards, Enrico
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 21:41:34 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Hi,
does anyone care about the Windows GTK 2.6 builds?
Maybe you could ask this on the main list ;-)
...
But I'm anyway asking myself if it's necessary to provide all these three files or if it weren't enough to provide only GTK 2.12 builds: the full installer (everything included, ready to go) and the ZIP file only including Geany itself for fast downloads.
Yes, this will stop Win9x support where GTK 2.12 doesn't run.
I'm just a little sick of compiling Geany on Windows every time two time from scratch. This is necessary for the GTK major versions. Only GTK 2.6 would mean no printing support on Windows and some minor missing features. GTK 2.12 means no Windows 9x support.
Personally I don't care about this. In the past I thought it was worth it, but my WinME machine is so messed up things don't really work anyway - Geany doesn't redraw the text properly - this may just be because of a completely messed up Windows system, DLLs overwritten with broken ones, etc.
Anyway, I think it's reasonable to stop providing binaries for Win9x, they can use the older ones or if someone else wants to do it, they can. Probably it's still useful to keep GTK 2.6 source compatibility in case any linux devs want to test windows code and only have an ancient windows install.
Regards, Nick
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:43:40 +0100, Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 21:41:34 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Hi,
does anyone care about the Windows GTK 2.6 builds?
Maybe you could ask this on the main list ;-)
Sure, just wanted to get a first opinion :D.
...
But I'm anyway asking myself if it's necessary to provide all these three files or if it weren't enough to provide only GTK 2.12 builds: the full installer (everything included, ready to go) and the ZIP file only including Geany itself for fast downloads.
Yes, this will stop Win9x support where GTK 2.12 doesn't run.
I'm just a little sick of compiling Geany on Windows every time two time from scratch. This is necessary for the GTK major versions. Only GTK 2.6 would mean no printing support on Windows and some minor missing features. GTK 2.12 means no Windows 9x support.
Personally I don't care about this. In the past I thought it was worth it, but my WinME machine is so messed up things don't really work anyway - Geany doesn't redraw the text properly - this may just be because of a completely messed up Windows system, DLLs overwritten with broken ones, etc.
Yeah, I also think there are actually not many Windows 9x users using Geany anymore. And even if, they can still build it from source.
Anyway, I think it's reasonable to stop providing binaries for Win9x, they can use the older ones or if someone else wants to do it, they can. Probably it's still useful to keep GTK 2.6 source compatibility in case any linux devs want to test windows code and only have an ancient windows install.
Of course, I never wanted to drop GTK 2.6 source compatibility. This doesn't hurt and is no problem at all. I'm only a bit tired of the extensive Windows build process (make clean, make all, make clean, make all, and again if anything has failed in between...and this on an emulated Windows on my main system...)
Regards, Enrico
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:51:12 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:43:40 +0100, Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 21:41:34 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Hi,
does anyone care about the Windows GTK 2.6 builds?
Maybe you could ask this on the main list ;-)
Sure, just wanted to get a first opinion :D.
You're right, it's good to discuss it first.
Of course, I never wanted to drop GTK 2.6 source compatibility. This
Cool, I thought I'd mention it to correct myself because on the main ML I suggested maybe raising the requirements for GLib, but I'd forgotten about the Win9x issue. There's not a need really anyway.
doesn't hurt and is no problem at all. I'm only a bit tired of the extensive Windows build process (make clean, make all, make clean, make all, and again if anything has failed in between...and this on an emulated Windows on my main system...)
;-)
Regards, Nick