Windows Packaging: WinLibre
[Bcc'd to Pierre-Jean Coudert of WinLibre; replies will go to inkscape-devel alone: I don't want to send too much unsolicited mail his way. Pierre-Jean, tu peux voir les réponses à http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=36054 si tu veux, et tu peux me répondre si tu veux que je fasse suivre à inkscape-devel.]
Every now and again, we come across packaging problems on Windows, and we say "It would be good to be able to hand these problems off to distributors, as we do for a number of un*x distributions", or "Someone should create a windows package consisting of inkscape, gimp, and perhaps other gtk software, so that they can share libraries."
I've just today discovered WinLibre, which does this: http://www.winlibre.com/en/index.php
It comes in two variants: a 650kB version that allows you to select which components you want (like a net install of a gnu/linux distribution), or a 171MB version suitable for putting on a CD.
However, I don't yet know to what extent WinLibre engages in packaging activities: i.e. do they just grab the Windows binary that we provide, or do they get the source so that they can share libraries between the programs ? (If it gives any clues, the News page mentions handling package dependencies, and that it uses InnoSetup 5.0.)
Is there anything we can do to work more closely with WinLibre ?
(Another compilation of Free Software for Windows is http://www.theopencd.org/. It has a good reputation, but it doesn't yet include Inkscape, and my impression from a couple of minutes at their web site is that they just use the binaries provided by individual projects rather than do much packaging/integration work themselves. As I say, that's just an impression that may well be wrong.)
pjrm.
Peter Moulder schrieb: ...
Every now and again, we come across packaging problems on Windows, and we say "It would be good to be able to hand these problems off to distributors, as we do for a number of un*x distributions", or "Someone should create a windows package consisting of inkscape, gimp, and perhaps other gtk software, so that they can share libraries."
I've just today discovered WinLibre, which does this: http://www.winlibre.com/en/index.php
.... Yes and there have been many complains about shipping the same dll's that are already on the system (if you use an other gtk application). Actually I prefer much the Gaim way. It ships in two versions: 1) with gtk dll's and 2) without gtk dll's. So I can use the gtk installer for gimp and gaim. I think Bob Jamison is working on that issue. Bob could you give a status ??? I would like to make the Win32-installer as close as that Gaim thing.
Peter what really does this Winlibre ? Is this a download center for the applications listed there ?
Thanks,
Adib. ---
On 9/11/05, Adib Taraben <taraben.a@...50...> wrote:
Yes and there have been many complains about shipping the same dll's that are already on the system (if you use an other gtk application).
We cannot reliably work with any versions of libs except those we tested with. There are too many version of GTK and the differences between them are too big. Just recently Bob switched to a new version, and now it crashes again on win98. It's way too unstable at the moment. So I oppose "sharing" libs with anyone else, at least at this time.
Adib Taraben wrote:
Peter Moulder schrieb: ...
Every now and again, we come across packaging problems on Windows, and we say "It would be good to be able to hand these problems off to distributors, as we do for a number of un*x distributions", or "Someone should create a windows package consisting of inkscape, gimp, and perhaps other gtk software, so that they can share libraries."
I've just today discovered WinLibre, which does this: http://www.winlibre.com/en/index.php
.... Yes and there have been many complains about shipping the same dll's that are already on the system (if you use an other gtk application). Actually I prefer much the Gaim way. It ships in two versions: 1) with gtk dll's and 2) without gtk dll's. So I can use the gtk installer for gimp and gaim.
Well, they complain, but do they volunteer to do the work? ;-)
I think Bob Jamison is working on that issue. Bob could you give a status ???
Well, I haven't done any work toward it yet, because I'm still looking at the problem. I have asked a couple of Gtk guys about this. There exist several issues to this problem:
1). Does the Gtk distribution stay current? We usually require a fairly recent version of the gtk-win libraries, not really in order to be as bleeding-edge as possible, but for bugfixes. Bug fixes in win32 trail behind those on Linux, sometimes for months. So we need recent versions on win32 simply in order to have a stability on a parity with Linux. We are going to want Cairo, too, which is gtk2.8+. For example: atk.dll still has 3 symbols missing from its exports, which are required by atkmm, and cause its build to fail. I need to fix this manually whenever I assemble the libs. Any automated mechanism would fail here.
2). Does it have an update mechanism? If we are adding a dependency to Inkscape, and also to others, how do we get recent changes without needing to reinstall everything? How do we prevent an update from breaking other apps? If there is a significant bugfix to the libs, how does everyone receive it? My idea was to have a mechanism something like apt-get or Portage to manage updates. Mingw.org has started a little project like this, but I don't know what the status of it is. Cygwin has a lovely update tool, too. Either way, I think that a 'live' Gtk-win32 distro might be a necessity.
3). How does this fulfill Inkscape dependencies? From what I've heard, the answer is to "do things our way." Use their Gtk distro as a base, and carry the payload of the other dependencies ourselves. We would likely want for them to alter their package slightly, (like adding sigc++/Gtkmm, which sounds reasonable, because they are small, and Gtkmm's versions stay in sync with Gtk versions), but not much. Beyond that would be selfish on our part. Besides, carrying our own deps is something that we do already.
4). What do we receive from this? Now this part -is- selfish ;-) How would adding this dependency benefit the developers who are doing the work? From looking at the Gtk libs, it looks as though they are runtime only. There are no development tools, headers, or libs included. So we would STILL be required to make our own Gtk library bundle for development. Not only that, but the version of the development libs would need to match those in the runtime. So we would basically be doubling our work, for no extra benefit. There should be a mechanism to help -us-, such as having a full development bundle (like we have) matching each runtime bundle. If you look at the gtk lib distros for win32 here: ftp://ftp.gtk.org/pub/gtk/v2.8/win32 ...you can see that is what the 'official' packages do. Those are the ones we use, by the way, so we are somewhat 'official' too!
5). Who wants to do this? Since this would be much extra work in addition to what we are already doing, this would require, IMHO, at least two more volunteers to do the packaging. The several of us who do Win32 building already have too much to do. And, in addition, any new volunteers would probably be most effective if they were also full-time members of the gimp-win project itself. That way, not only would we be less of a burden on them, but we could address our problems ourselves, and help them out with the things that we have learned. That is the Open Source method: see a problem, fix it yourself. I am sure that they would love to have more workers. And having an Inkscape liaison in their group would be excellent.
6). ...HOWEVER... Now, after all of this negativity, let me say that having a single standard library set for all win32 Gtk apps would be a WONDERFUL thing. The "issues" above are merely issues. They are just things that need to be (and can be) solved... probably quite easily.
I just noticed that I need to perform some important chores (the pub is open), so I will see you all later...
Bob
On Sep 11, 2005, at 8:05 AM, Adib Taraben wrote:
Yes and there have been many complains about shipping the same dll's that are already on the system (if you use an other gtk application).
Just for the record, the newer "preferred" way for native Windows apps is for them to have their own versions of DLLs, unless it's system DLLs they're using.
Peter Moulder wrote:
[Bcc'd to Pierre-Jean Coudert of WinLibre; replies will go to inkscape-devel alone: I don't want to send too much unsolicited mail his way. Pierre-Jean, tu peux voir les réponses à http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=36054 si tu veux, et tu peux me répondre si tu veux que je fasse suivre à inkscape-devel.]
Every now and again, we come across packaging problems on Windows, and we say "It would be good to be able to hand these problems off to distributors, as we do for a number of un*x distributions", or "Someone should create a windows package consisting of inkscape, gimp, and perhaps other gtk software, so that they can share libraries."
I've just today discovered WinLibre, which does this: http://www.winlibre.com/en/index.php
It comes in two variants: a 650kB version that allows you to select which components you want (like a net install of a gnu/linux distribution), or a 171MB version suitable for putting on a CD.
However, I don't yet know to what extent WinLibre engages in packaging activities: i.e. do they just grab the Windows binary that we provide, or do they get the source so that they can share libraries between the programs ? (If it gives any clues, the News page mentions handling package dependencies, and that it uses InnoSetup 5.0.)
Hi Inkscapers !
I'm Pierre-Jean from the WinLibre project.
Actually the dependencies handling in WinLibre is very rough. But, we are working with 4 students (from the Summer of Code program) to build a new distribution tool written in python. We are about to merge the 4 projects to provide an integrated tool for one of the next WinLibre's releases. The goal is to handle automatic install, uninstall and update for every included package.
Is there anything we can do to work more closely with WinLibre ?
We would be very happy to work more closely with you guys. It could help to move the projects in a more user friendly direction.
Regards,
Pierre-Jean Coudert, WinLibre.
(Another compilation of Free Software for Windows is http://www.theopencd.org/. It has a good reputation, but it doesn't yet include Inkscape, and my impression from a couple of minutes at their web site is that they just use the binaries provided by individual projects rather than do much packaging/integration work themselves. As I say, that's just an impression that may well be wrong.)
pjrm.
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005, Pierre-Jean Coudert wrote:
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:59:40 +0200 From: Pierre-Jean Coudert <coudert@...8...> To: inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Windows Packaging: WinLibre
Peter Moulder wrote:
[Bcc'd to Pierre-Jean Coudert of WinLibre; replies will go to inkscape-devel alone: I don't want to send too much unsolicited mail his way. Pierre-Jean, tu peux voir les r�ponses � http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=36054 si tu veux, et tu peux me r�pondre si tu veux que je fasse suivre � inkscape-devel.]
Every now and again, we come across packaging problems on Windows, and we say "It would be good to be able to hand these problems off to distributors, as we do for a number of un*x distributions", or "Someone should create a windows package consisting of inkscape, gimp, and perhaps other gtk software, so that they can share libraries."
There is a workaround, you can install Inkscape, delete the Gtk version we ship and it should fall back to the shared common system version of Gtk.
It should be possible to include an option in the installer to use an existing copy of GTK but the trick will be to make sure users are not left without any GTK at all or with a version that is not recent enough.
Do not forget although a load minority complain our simpler more straighforward setup is what the quiet majority of users actually want. http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/diary.html?start=262#computer-arts
and there is a complaint in theOpenCD wiki about the GIMP not being "slick" like GAIM which like Inkscape includes a copy of GTK
See point marked (3) http://maitri.ubuntu.com/theopencd/wiki/index.php/List_of_Candidates_v2.1
I've just today discovered WinLibre, which does this: http://www.winlibre.com/en/index.php
Dont forget theOpenCD.org http://theopencd.org/
(I'm willing to bet there are more people using Gtk based software on Windows than there are using Gnome/Gtk on Linux but it would be a tough one to prove (and counting Mozilla is probably cheating even if it does techinically use Gtk). Wonder how inkscape download statistics are distributed by platform?
However, I don't yet know to what extent WinLibre engages in packaging activities: i.e. do they just grab the Windows binary that we provide,
They do exactly that but if the inkscape installer were improved it would be possible for them to run a fully scripted unattended install and wrap it in a their own standardised installer. The integration both projects make a big deal about is having a nice integrated interface for the CD like a magazine coverdisk would do.
We would be very happy to work more closely with you guys. It could help to move the projects in a more user friendly direction.
The stuff I suggested above would probably help.
There is section in the Wiki about the Win32 installer http://wiki.inkscape.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Win32_Installer
I expect Adib would appreciate any help he can get. NSIS is easy enough when you know (but knowing how is the hard part) and the examples are cover most of what you would want to do.
If you want to encourage theOpenCD to include Inkscape it would be a good idea to make sure inkscape meets all their requirements http://maitri.ubuntu.com/theopencd/index.php?option=com_static&staticfil... (frankly I think inkscape is still a little too rough around the edges for the mass market and they already include OpenOffice Draw) They dont have time to review every bit of software and wait for others to review the software first.
Their site seems quite broken at the moment in places (the whole forum seems to be missing) so you would want to skip directly to their Wiki http://maitri.ubuntu.com/theopencd/wiki/index.php/Inkscape
Already got a million and one other things to do and although this seems complicated at first it could be broken down into many small tasks and is something most users would be able to help out with.
- Alan
However, I don't yet know to what extent WinLibre engages in packaging activities: i.e. do they just grab the Windows binary that we provide, or do they get the source so that they can share libraries between the programs ? (If it gives any clues, the News page mentions handling package dependencies, and that it uses InnoSetup 5.0.)
Hi Inkscapers !
I'm Pierre-Jean from the WinLibre project.
Actually the dependencies handling in WinLibre is very rough. But, we are working with 4 students (from the Summer of Code program) to build a new distribution tool written in python. We are about to merge the 4 projects to provide an integrated tool for one of the next WinLibre's releases. The goal is to handle automatic install, uninstall and update for every included package.
Is there anything we can do to work more closely with WinLibre ?
We would be very happy to work more closely with you guys. It could help to move the projects in a more user friendly direction.
Regards,
Pierre-Jean Coudert, WinLibre.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 09:05:36AM +1000, Pierre-Jean Coudert wrote:
Is there anything we can do to work more closely with WinLibre ?
We would be very happy to work more closely with you guys. It could help to move the projects in a more user friendly direction.
I notice in yesterday's announcement of WinLibre 0.4.0 beta1 (http://www.winlibre.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=323) that it includes inkscape 0.41.
You might consider doing something to save yourself from a barrage of "Inkscape gives this nasty error about missing dependencies" questions.
One way of addressing this would of course be to switch to 0.42.2 :) .
Are there any issues in 0.42.2 (not present in 0.41) that you'd like to tell us?
Is the exclusion of 0.42.2 just because you haven't had enough time to test it (and there were some windows problems in the original 0.42), or is there something else?
pjrm.
participants (7)
-
Adib Taraben -
Alan Horkan -
Bob Jamison -
bulia byak -
Jon A. Cruz -
Peter Moulder -
Pierre-Jean Coudert