README.w32

ghazel commented

2007-10-27 07:22:57 +00:00

Owner

As discovered at the hack-a-thon, zfec requies c99 and MS never plans to support c99. This patch (should) make zfec c89 compliant without any significant change in runtime or memory behevaiour (yay alloca).

You should probably run unittests if you have any. I was able to compile and run tahoe just fine, but that is by no means a full test.

As discovered at the hack-a-thon, zfec requies c99 and MS never plans to support c99. This patch (should) make zfec c89 compliant without any significant change in runtime or memory behevaiour (yay alloca). You should probably run unittests if you have any. I was able to compile and run tahoe just fine, but that is by no means a full test.

tahoe-lafs added the

labels 2007-10-27 07:22:57 +00:00

tahoe-lafs added this to the undecided milestone 2007-10-27 07:22:57 +00:00

ghazel commented

2007-10-27 07:23:17 +00:00

Author

Owner

Attachment c89.diff (7868 bytes) added

c89 diff

**Attachment** c89.diff (7868 bytes) added c89 diff

c89.diff

7.7 KiB

zooko commented

2007-10-29 16:56:26 +00:00

Author

Owner

Thank you for the patch! I'll accept it into the source code immediately, but there are a few other things we should do:

Can you give me a reference for Microsoft's position on C99? (That still makes me sad. I think C99 is nice.) Anyway, I'd like to have a link to Microsoft's statement on it to reference in the future. Also, I suppose, if their stated reason is "lack of requests from customers", then I guess I could as a paying customer of Microsoft developer tools request that they add C99 support.
We could use a Windows buildslave, see http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/ticket/7#comment:17
Somebody should update the [README]source:README and the [README.w32]source:README.w32 to explain how you can, in fact, build tahoe with the Microsoft tools.

Thanks!

Thank you for the patch! I'll accept it into the source code immediately, but there are a few other things we should do: 1. Can you give me a reference for Microsoft's position on C99? (That still makes me sad. I think C99 is nice.) Anyway, I'd like to have a link to Microsoft's statement on it to reference in the future. Also, I suppose, if their stated reason is "lack of requests from customers", then I guess I could as a paying customer of Microsoft developer tools request that they add C99 support. 2. We could use a Windows buildslave, see <http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/ticket/7#comment:17> 3. Somebody should update the [README]source:README and the [README.w32]source:README.w32 to explain how you can, in fact, build tahoe with the Microsoft tools. Thanks!

zooko commented

2007-12-18 00:04:15 +00:00

Author

Owner

We now have e-mail from trac working, so ghazel will hopefully receive an e-mail note.

zooko commented

2007-12-18 00:05:49 +00:00

Author

Owner

Mike Booker has agreed to do #3 -- update the READMEs to explain how to build with Microsoft tools. Mike -- is that right? You are going to do this?

tahoe-lafs added

0.7.0

and removed

unknown

labels 2007-12-20 18:37:51 +00:00

tahoe-lafs modified the milestone from undecided to 0.7.0

2007-12-20 18:37:51 +00:00

zooko commented

2007-12-20 18:42:39 +00:00

Author

Owner

My second request -- a Windows buildslave -- has been satisfied. Although note that this is a Windows buildslave which uses cygwin build tools. There is an open ticket to create a Windows buildslave that uses Microsoft build tools: #230.

My first request -- a link to Microsoft's official position on supporting C99 -- remains unresolved. I would like to be able to write an effective mail saying "I am a Microsoft customer, and I request this feature.", and to facilitate other people who want C99 support to do the same.

Mike is working on the third request -- updating the README.w32. (Possibly he will even create a README.w32.VisualStudio so that people who are going to do the all-cygwin way and the cygwin-tools-to-build-native-objects way can have their own path through the instructions.)

My second request -- a Windows buildslave -- has been satisfied. Although note that this is a Windows buildslave which uses cygwin build tools. There is an open ticket to create a Windows buildslave that uses Microsoft build tools: #230. My first request -- a link to Microsoft's official position on supporting C99 -- remains unresolved. I would like to be able to write an effective mail saying "I am a Microsoft customer, and I request this feature.", and to facilitate other people who want C99 support to do the same. Mike is working on the third request -- updating the `README.w32`. (Possibly he will even create a `README.w32.VisualStudio` so that people who are going to do the all-cygwin way and the cygwin-tools-to-build-native-objects way can have their own path through the instructions.)

tahoe-lafs changed title from ~~c89 patch for zfec~~ to README.w32

2007-12-20 18:42:39 +00:00

zooko commented

2008-01-07 05:44:14 +00:00

Author

Owner

I'm going to update our docs to explain that building with Microsoft tools is currently not supported because of pyOpenSSL.

zooko commented

2008-01-08 17:26:07 +00:00

Author

Owner

RobK made some good updates to docs:README.win32 yesterday. It needs a lot more work (structure -- separating cygwin from Windows-native, probably, and perhaps HTML-formatting), but I'm bumping this ticket out of 0.7.0 now.

zooko commented

2008-01-23 02:57:16 +00:00

Author

Owner

Documenting our build process is one of those things that isn't actually a requirement for the Allmydata 3.0 product, but which we should not put off, so I'm putting this ticket into 0.8.0.

tahoe-lafs added this to the 0.8.0 (Allmydata 3.0 Beta) milestone 2008-01-23 02:57:16 +00:00

zooko commented

2008-03-08 01:39:28 +00:00

Author

Owner

Assigning to RobK. Rob: feel free to bump it to a future Milestone, close it, etc. as appropriate.

tahoe-lafs modified the milestone from 0.8.0 (Allmydata 3.0 Beta) to 0.9.0 (Allmydata 3.0 final)

2008-03-08 02:36:00 +00:00

zooko commented

2008-05-29 22:47:02 +00:00

Author

Owner

also fix up (or kill) source:docs/install-details.html

tahoe-lafs added

documentation

and removed

code-encoding

labels 2008-05-29 22:47:02 +00:00

zooko commented

2008-06-05 19:29:11 +00:00

Author

Owner

For the moment I have removed README.win32 and docs/install-detailed.html from the source tree and I'm bumping this issue to 1.1.1. Actually I'm closing this as a duplicate of #282 (more detailed and targeted docs about installing from source).

tahoe-lafs added the

duplicate

label 2008-06-05 19:29:11 +00:00

zooko closed this issue

2008-06-05 19:29:11 +00:00

README.w32 #194