On 21 Apr 2016 00:30, "Partha Bagchi" <partha1b@...400...> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Eduard Braun <Eduard.Braun2@...173...> wrote:
>>
>> On 20 April 2016 at 21:45, Partha Bagchi <partha1b@...400...> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, this page looks more like it. However, this page asks you to create minGW Makefiles as opposed to MSYS Makefiles I suggested. This is OK as well. I personally prefer the Msys shell to do my various builds.
>>>
>>> I think Eduard is managing this page? I have been providing the devlibs for the 64-bit builds while he's been handling the packaging and building. Let's wait for him to respond.
>>
>>
>> Sorry guys, I only updated the page to adapt it to the updated devlibs provided by Partha and only with respect to the btool build.
>> I did not have time to look into CMake myself, so I can't help you out with it (yet).
>
> I have not tried to build Inkscape with cmake and I'll be able to help out when I have some time to git clone and build.
>>
>>
>> @Partha: What's the advantage of "MSYS Makefiles" compared to "minGW Makefiles"?
>
> Well, as I said, I prefer Msys since I've been using it for a long time. It provides a very familiar bash like shell on Windows for me and that's all I use it for. So, it should not be a hardship for anyone, I think. :)

Because of gits popularity whatever is included in the git for windows installation is likely to be the choice that gains most developer traction:

>>
>> The problem I see is that we'd probably have to require peole to install MSYS and therefore yet another dependecy which would make it even harder to get started with development on Windows. If we could avoid it that would likely be preferable, but if MSYS offers a large benefit it might be worth a thought.
>
> Well to me, Msys is "install it and forget it", but ymmv.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Eduard
>
>