I decided to start a new thread on the ML about this effort. That way people who don't care can skip past it. I've documented my baby steps at a wiki page on my my github clone of shoes. No need to stuff my long winded musings at the main wiki. That's at https://github.com/ccoupe/shoes/wiki/Cross-Compile-in-Linux-to-MingW-Windows-Shoes and it's not for the C adverse. It goes places I didn't really think about.
This is great, Cecil, thanks. I'm excited: the windows build process is the worst. If I can help you out somehow, let me know. I'll be watching the wiki page closely.
Thanks for the encouragement because it's a bigger and bigger project the more I dig into it. Like including and building Ruby and all the dependencies from source and maintaining them. On the bright side, parts of this are being done and recipes exist. Nokogiri cross compiles its binary gems from OSX. An item for list discussion is which Ruby version to use. I could use 1.9.3 because by the time this cross compiled Shoes, ruby and dependencies and Shoes problems in OSX or Linux with 1.9.3 will be worked out and there will be several patch levels of 1.9.3 or a 1.9.4 There are also merits to sticking with 1.9.1 and current library versions used in Shoes/Windows because we know it works with Red Shoes/MingW so any errors I see in a cross compiled Shoes/Windows would be ones I created and not some change in Ruby or Cairo or Pango or or or. It is a big deal because the Shoes community takes some new responsibility for maintaining that additional code base at whatever Ruby version is chosen and not go willy nilly into the future without bringing the cross compiled code base along. Of course thats an issue for building on Windows for Windows. Does anyone know if Shoes runs under Wine. It would be big help if it does. On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 11:15 -0500, Steve Klabnik wrote: > This is great, Cecil, thanks. I'm excited: the windows build process > is the worst. If I can help you out somehow, let me know. I'll be > watching the wiki page closely.
Can't respond directly to MRI cross-compilation quesiton. Just FYI I am now running Jruby --1.9 mode in my dev. I expect to continue that way. Regards, Peter Fitzgibbons (847) 859-9550 Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com
Peter, 1.9.0 had some serious fubar for MRI releases! Basing Brown Shoes on 1.9.1/2/3 would be better for your project, IMO. --Cecil On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 23:30 -0600, Peter Fitzgibbons wrote: > Can't respond directly to MRI cross-compilation quesiton. > > > Just FYI I am now running Jruby --1.9 mode in my dev. I expect to > continue that way. > > > Regards, > Peter Fitzgibbons > (847) 859-9550 > Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com > IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons > IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com > >
Jruby Also, 1.9.3 fixed many problems, at least in my rails projects. YMMV Peter Fitzgibbons (847) 859-9550 Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:47 PM, Cecil Coupe <ccoupe@cableone.net> wrote: > Peter, > > 1.9.0 had some serious fubar for MRI releases! Basing Brown Shoes on > 1.9.1/2/3 would be better for your project, IMO. > > --Cecil > On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 23:30 -0600, Peter Fitzgibbons wrote: > > Can't respond directly to MRI cross-compilation quesiton. > > > > > > Just FYI I am now running Jruby --1.9 mode in my dev. I expect to > > continue that way. > > > > > > Regards, > > Peter Fitzgibbons > > (847) 859-9550 > > Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com > > IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons > > IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com > > > > > > >
I would prefer 1.9.3. There's a bug with Hackety where it crashes on about 30% of windows machines every 15 minutes, and I'm pretty sure it's a threading issue. 1.9.1's threads were rough. Then again, if it's easier to start with 1.9.1, and upgrade after, I can certainly see the value in that approach.
Windows installations fail 20% of the time for no reason whatsoever. This is my personal experience and measurement from installation of apps on several hundred workstations. 1 in 5 will fail. Debugging if futile. You will be assimilated. Peter Fitzgibbons (847) 859-9550 Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote: > I would prefer 1.9.3. There's a bug with Hackety where it crashes on > about 30% of windows machines every 15 minutes, and I'm pretty sure > it's a threading issue. 1.9.1's threads were rough. > > Then again, if it's easier to start with 1.9.1, and upgrade after, I > can certainly see the value in that approach. >
Whoah. I haven't heard about failed _installations_.
I think I'll use 1.9.3 (we already have a Windows 1.9.1 with problems) I did true the unpacked shoes.exe with Wine and it works enough for my purposes [does it run at all]. That said Wine is not usable. Shoes triggers a FAQ problem that the Wine folks don't think they can or will fix. The startup screen for Shoes is the right size but it flashes between the bakeground and the para links so it looks like it's scrolling. But thats enough to know that the .exe will load and run. There are serious wine errors spit out on the wine terminal. A font problem or two and once a deadlock warning. On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 10:49 -0500, Steve Klabnik wrote: > I would prefer 1.9.3. There's a bug with Hackety where it crashes on > about 30% of windows machines every 15 minutes, and I'm pretty sure > it's a threading issue. 1.9.1's threads were rough. > > Then again, if it's easier to start with 1.9.1, and upgrade after, I > can certainly see the value in that approach.
Does shoes GUI run ok wihin a VM, VirtualBox maybe? I've had good luck in the past running WinXp/Win7 on virtualbox. Thoughts? Peter Fitzgibbons (847) 859-9550 Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Cecil Coupe <ccoupe@cableone.net> wrote: > I think I'll use 1.9.3 (we already have a Windows 1.9.1 with problems) > > I did true the unpacked shoes.exe with Wine and it works enough for > my purposes [does it run at all]. That said Wine is not usable. Shoes > triggers a FAQ problem that the Wine folks don't think they can or will > fix. The startup screen for Shoes is the right size but it flashes > between the bakeground and the para links so it looks like it's > scrolling. But thats enough to know that the .exe will load and run. > > There are serious wine errors spit out on the wine terminal. A font > problem or two and once a deadlock warning. > > On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 10:49 -0500, Steve Klabnik wrote: > > I would prefer 1.9.3. There's a bug with Hackety where it crashes on > > about 30% of windows machines every 15 minutes, and I'm pretty sure > > it's a threading issue. 1.9.1's threads were rough. > > > > Then again, if it's easier to start with 1.9.1, and upgrade after, I > > can certainly see the value in that approach. > > >
Shoes runs fine in a OracleBox VM. It will have to used to really test that the cross compiled Shoes is doing what Shoes should do but the Wine test will show that I've compiled things well enough(when I get there) to get ruby+shoes to put up opening splash screen. It's a lot faster than cranking up the XP2 in a VM and copying Shoes.exe to it. Unless someone fixes the Wine bugs or fixes what Shoes is doing to cause them which is not my intent. It's tempting though because it would so much easier to work on Shoes/Windows without Windows. Wine has copious logging abilities and even a gdb to help, but I'm not that deep into Windows internals and I don't want be. On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 21:11 -0600, Peter Fitzgibbons wrote: > Does shoes GUI run ok wihin a VM, VirtualBox maybe? > I've had good luck in the past running WinXp/Win7 on virtualbox. > Thoughts? > > Peter Fitzgibbons > (847) 859-9550 > Email: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com > IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons > IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons@gmail.com > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Cecil Coupe <ccoupe@cableone.net> > wrote: > I think I'll use 1.9.3 (we already have a Windows 1.9.1 with > problems) > > I did true the unpacked shoes.exe with Wine and it works > enough for > my purposes [does it run at all]. That said Wine is not > usable. Shoes > triggers a FAQ problem that the Wine folks don't think they > can or will > fix. The startup screen for Shoes is the right size but it > flashes > between the bakeground and the para links so it looks like > it's > scrolling. But thats enough to know that the .exe will load > and run. > > There are serious wine errors spit out on the wine terminal. A > font > problem or two and once a deadlock warning. > > On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 10:49 -0500, Steve Klabnik wrote: > > I would prefer 1.9.3. There's a bug with Hackety where it > crashes on > > about 30% of windows machines every 15 minutes, and I'm > pretty sure > > it's a threading issue. 1.9.1's threads were rough. > > > > Then again, if it's easier to start with 1.9.1, and upgrade > after, I > > can certainly see the value in that approach. > > > > >
Hi Cecil, "Cross Compile in Linux to MingW Windows Shoes"... Great! :-D I have no skills about cross compiling. xx-P But I have Windows 7 and XP. So, when you build Shoes.exe, let me know. I'll test your build on my Windows pc and send you the feedback. ;-) ashbb