FreeTDS Development Group

[Paul Thurston <pthurston AT netegrate.com>]

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: freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
[mailto:freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] 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 
<pthurston AT netegrate.com<mailto:pthurston AT netegrate.com>>:

> 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: freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org

> [mailto:freetds-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] 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 
> <pthurston AT netegrate.com<mailto:pthurston AT netegrate.com<mailto:pthurston AT netegrate.com%3cmailto:pthurston AT netegrate.com>>>
>  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

>

> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org%3cmailto:FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org>>

>

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

> _______________________________________________

> FreeTDS mailing list

> FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org>

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

>

_______________________________________________

FreeTDS mailing list

FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:FreeTDS AT lists.ibiblio.org>

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