FreeTDS Development Group

[Harry Sfougaris <hsfougaris AT gmail.com>]

If I may also add my 2 cents:

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

I believe there should also be compiled applications (especially in 
straightforward OSs like Windows and OSX). 
I would think that most developers are interested in just using the 
libraries, and don't need or really want to compile themselves, but they are 
currently forced to.

> - as dll or as static libraries? Personally I'd prefer dll.
If dll means more compatibility between the various compilers available under 
Windows (from what I understood from a previous message, .lib are not really 
compatible), then that would definitely be preferred. 
It would be a shame to have a cross platform library that only works with 
solutions built specifically with Visual Studio.

Thanks,
Harry

On 14 Μαϊ 2010, at 1:16 π.μ., Paul Thurston wrote:

> 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