Re: [Bug Report] Missing Winsock initialization in v0.82

Frediano:

Agreed that the Windows distribution is sorely in need of an overhaul.
How about if we just ease to this at first?

Can we just put together, say, a  VC10 solution together that build the dlls?
Something like getting dblib.lib, libTDS.lib, FreeTDS.lib and FreeTDS.dll ?

As Damien noticed, the static libs are gigantic, because everything is being sucked in &  statically linked,
I too prefer the DLLs.

Would it be reasonable to take the old msvc6 project and upgrade it to msvc10?
If you like, I could work on this.

Paul


From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Frediano Ziglio
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 6:00 PM
To: FreeTDS Development Group
Subject: Re: [freetds] [Bug Report] Missing Winsock initialization in v0.82


2010/5/13 Paul Thurston <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:

> Damien:

>

> I agree with you. If we set-up, say, CMake, it would be analogous to the gmake set-up on  Unix.

> With enough CMake switches, users could easily configure their favorite build flavor.

>

>  Paul

>

>



I'm not again inserting new VS projects files to the repository/distribution however I think there are already too much different windows project files and they are even very different !!

Currently

- Dev-C++ project (odbc only)

- ms vc6++ files (dblib, odbc and libTDS also files for unittests, the more complete and obsolete one)

- Nmakefile for VS (dblib and apps)

- VS 2005 project files (dblib and libTDS) There is also a source NSI installer  for odbc! Some projects produce static libraries while other dll... quite a bunch of alternatives!



I'm working on FreeTDS so much that I think I know the exactly position and history of every file... this help in many way but is a problem in others... many things are taken for granted. Reading some recently mails reveals that packaging is REALLY WRONG (at least about Windows). I thought anybody would just unpack distribution and start a build quite easy but this is not true. Happily I passed a "make dist-zip" to a collegue of mine and got a compile without any hints,,, perhaps it's an Italian way of thinking...



I think that before adding other files is better to define what we want to provide, remove old and obsolete stuff and write some document (a README.windows ??).



Some question

- which libraries? I think all main libraries (dblib, ctlib and odbc while replacements and libTDS just static and not installed)

- as dll or as static libraries? Personally I'd prefer dll.

- provide compiled applications ? I would so, but not necessary

- provide unittests ? I would so



About SCons/CMake/whatever.. this would resolve project versions problems for Windows. I don't know about portability under Unices, probably autoconf/autoheader/automake/autogomad are more portable and please... don't think to replace anything just before release !!!



Personally I think to

- remove dev-cpp project files, obsolete

- write something about compiling stuff (integrating README ones) and Windows ones



As usual any additional hint, comment, work... anything is welcome!



Frediano



>

> From: [email protected]

> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Damien

> Churchill

> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 7:30 AM

> To: FreeTDS Development Group

> Subject: Re: [freetds] [Bug Report] Missing Winsock initialization in

> v0.82

>

>

> On 13 May 2010 12:11, Paul Thurston <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]%3cmailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:

>

>> Frediano:

>

>>

>

>> I don't think it's important to worry about other Windows IDEs besides Visual Studio.

>

>>

>

>> There are two reasons for my thinking on this:

>

>>

>

>> 1.       Visual Studio is the standard IDE for Windows Development

>

>>

>

>> 2.       Alternative IDEs (Borland, MingW, etc) usually contain utility tools to port from a VS project.

>

>>

>

>> Maintaining project files for the two most recent versions of Visual Studio seems like more than enough support.

>

>> This should allow folks to easily customize the 'standard' FreeTDS configuration to one of their own liking.

>

>>

>

>> Let's ask Damien for his opinion on this one.

>

>>

>

>> Best,

>

>>

>

>> Paul

>

>>

>

>

>

> I personally think that putting a standard cross platform system in place would be more useful. Whenever there is duplication there is always the risk that things will go out of sync!

>

>

>

> However if this is a bit too out of scope then merely maintaining a VS project would suffice. I would prefer to do the former and am willing to give my time to do so.

>

> _______________________________________________

>

> FreeTDS mailing list

>

> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]%3cmailto:[email protected]>>

>

> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds

> _______________________________________________

> FreeTDS mailing list

> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds

>

_______________________________________________

FreeTDS mailing list

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds