Rant: So you want help?

[Cristian Oneţ]

On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Gilles Caulier <caulier.gilles at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/11/5 Thomas Friedrichsmeier <thomas.friedrichsmeier at ruhr-uni-bochum.de>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thursday 04 November 2010, Patrick Spendrin wrote:
>>> KDE on Windows building/packaging works this way:
>>
>> ok, let's focus on creating a 4.5.x release. So far, it seems to me the
>> greatest obstacles are:
>>
>> 1) Only few people really know what precisely needs to be done to create a
>> release. Your sketch certainly helps understanding some of the major steps.
>> But still, I for one simply wouldn't know where to start. So I'm hoping for
>> very specifc instructions. Naturally, there will be problems of all sorts on
>> the way, and you can hardly anticipate and document all of that. But in an
>> ideal world, what would be the sequence of commands needed to create a
>> release?
>>
>> 2) Creating a release is a daunting task, and it's hard to split up into more
>> managable portions. Let's break this one up some more, into mostly independent
>> problems:
>>
>> 2a) Packaging dependencies: Alright, I can see the pain involved. But are
>> missing dependencies really still an issue for a 4.5.x release? If so, do you
>> have a list (complete or not) of which ones in particular? I guess it should
>> be possible to split up at least this point among several people, easily.
>
> From digiKam viewpoint, the next 2.0.0 release will require OpenCV
> library for face detection stuff.
>
> On my Win7, it compile fine with TDM-GCC and MSVC2008. It's a libary
> managed by Cmake. So it's easy to include as windows installer package
>
>>
>> 2b) I keep stumbling across the "multitude of compilers" issue. If ressources
>> are this limited, then trying to package for several compilers at once looks
>> totally counter-productive to me at this point of time. I've stated before
>> that I'm all for dropping everything except MinGW4-32bit from the installer,
>> but I guess this idea won't be accepted (I'd still appreciate any direct
>> feedback, though).
>
> From a developer viewpoint, to have at least Mingw4-32 + MSVC is very
> instructive. Some warnings/errors can be see with GCC, some others
> with M$ compiler. both are complementary.
>
> I never run digiKam & co using MSVC bin, for a simple reason : it
> crash at start up due a binary uncompatibility between KDE4 packages
> compiled with MSVC 2006 and digiKam compiled with MSVC2008
>
> I always use GCC. All compile and run fine.
>
> From an user viewpoint it's a very confuse situation. Why 2 compiler
> packages version exist... Only one is enough.

+1
So the compiler choice could be hidden from the normal user but it
should stay the way it is now from a developer's POV. Having different
compilers go trough the code is really good thing.

Regards,
Cristian Onet