Thread: Why no ZIP version for Windows anymore?
Brought to you by:
thesun
From: Piotr M. <zax...@gm...> - 2009-02-13 16:17:17
|
Hi, I see that since a version 1.06 there is no new version packed as ZIP archive, which was running on the system where the admin rights were revoked, so this version was working as a portable version. I wonder why now only the MSI packages are available. Is it possible to get the latest version as the ZIP archive as well? Regards, Zax |
From: Shachar S. <sh...@sh...> - 2009-02-13 17:17:20
|
Piotr Martyniuk wrote: > Hi, > > I see that since a version 1.06 there is no new version packed as ZIP > archive, which was running on the system where the admin rights were > revoked, so this version was working as a portable version. > I wonder why now only the MSI packages are available. Is it possible > to get the latest version as the ZIP archive as well? > > Regards, > Zax Hi Zax, The answer is actually in the archives. I switched to a new compiler (Visual Studio 9), and it requires runtime libraries that can only be installed with an installer. As such, I switched the entire distribution to an installer based one. Do feel free to compile the program yourself with a compiler that does not have such strict runtime libraries requirements. Shachar |
From: Piotr M. <zax...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 10:43:49
|
Hi Shachar, The answer is actually in the archives. Yes, I found it now. > I switched to a new compiler (Visual Studio 9), and it requires runtime > libraries that can only be installed with an installer. As such, I switched > the entire distribution to an installer based one. Is there a way to make rsyncrypto portable the way it was up to the version 1.06? For me it is OK if I install it on my machine at home, but then I would like to use it also at work where I have no admin rights to install it properly. I try to copy the files from the folder where the rsyncrypto was installed on my local machine, but this cause an execution errors. > Do feel free to compile the program yourself with a compiler that does not > have such strict runtime libraries requirements. I'm afraid that this is bit too much for my skills. I try to compile it using a MinGW package, but it was not successful as it is requires lot of dependent libraries. I try to compile it under Cygwin, but it is bit too much to carry around on the USB stick justo to have the rsyncrypto. Regards, Zax |
From: Julian P. R. <jul...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 14:01:02
|
For the same reason I have a compiling version of 1.06 that has been patched with most of the changes between 1.06 and 1.12... In this way I have a 'portable' version with more or less the latest bug fixes and features... Email me if you're interested. On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Piotr Martyniuk <zax...@gm...>wrote: > Hi Shachar, > > The answer is actually in the archives. > > > Yes, I found it now. > > >> I switched to a new compiler (Visual Studio 9), and it requires runtime >> libraries that can only be installed with an installer. As such, I switched >> the entire distribution to an installer based one. > > > Is there a way to make rsyncrypto portable the way it was up to the version > 1.06? For me it is OK if I install it on my machine at home, but then I > would like to use it also at work where I have no admin rights to install it > properly. I try to copy the files from the folder where the rsyncrypto was > installed on my local machine, but this cause an execution errors. > > >> Do feel free to compile the program yourself with a compiler that does not >> have such strict runtime libraries requirements. > > > I'm afraid that this is bit too much for my skills. I try to compile it > using a MinGW package, but it was not successful as it is requires lot of > dependent libraries. I try to compile it under Cygwin, but it is bit too > much to carry around on the USB stick justo to have the rsyncrypto. > > Regards, > Zax > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, > CA > -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the > Enterprise > -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source > participation > -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: > SFAD > http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H > _______________________________________________ > Rsyncrypto-devel mailing list > Rsy...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rsyncrypto-devel > > |
From: Piotr M. <zax...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 11:01:01
|
Maybe it would be possible to store your version on the sourceforge as well, so more people could use your version. Regards, Zax On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:51, Julian Pace Ross <jul...@gm...>wrote: > For the same reason I have a compiling version of 1.06 that has been > patched with most of the changes between 1.06 and 1.12... In this way I have > a 'portable' version with more or less the latest bug fixes and features... > Email me if you're interested. > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Piotr Martyniuk <zax...@gm...>wrote: > >> Hi Shachar, >> >> The answer is actually in the archives. >> >> >> Yes, I found it now. >> >> >>> I switched to a new compiler (Visual Studio 9), and it requires runtime >>> libraries that can only be installed with an installer. As such, I switched >>> the entire distribution to an installer based one. >> >> >> Is there a way to make rsyncrypto portable the way it was up to the >> version 1.06? For me it is OK if I install it on my machine at home, but >> then I would like to use it also at work where I have no admin rights to >> install it properly. I try to copy the files from the folder where the >> rsyncrypto was installed on my local machine, but this cause an execution >> errors. >> >> >>> Do feel free to compile the program yourself with a compiler that does >>> not have such strict runtime libraries requirements. >> >> >> I'm afraid that this is bit too much for my skills. I try to compile it >> using a MinGW package, but it was not successful as it is requires lot of >> dependent libraries. I try to compile it under Cygwin, but it is bit too >> much to carry around on the USB stick justo to have the rsyncrypto. >> >> Regards, >> Zax >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, >> CA >> -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the >> Enterprise >> -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source >> participation >> -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: >> SFAD >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H >> _______________________________________________ >> Rsyncrypto-devel mailing list >> Rsy...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rsyncrypto-devel >> >> > |
From: Julian P. R. <jul...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 11:26:29
|
Don't think it's a good idea... there should just be one version to avoid confusion. On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Piotr Martyniuk <zax...@gm...>wrote: > Maybe it would be possible to store your version on the sourceforge as > well, so more people could use your version. > > Regards, > Zax > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:51, Julian Pace Ross <jul...@gm... > > wrote: > >> For the same reason I have a compiling version of 1.06 that has been >> patched with most of the changes between 1.06 and 1.12... In this way I have >> a 'portable' version with more or less the latest bug fixes and features... >> Email me if you're interested. >> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Piotr Martyniuk <zax...@gm...>wrote: >> >>> Hi Shachar, >>> >>> The answer is actually in the archives. >>> >>> >>> Yes, I found it now. >>> >>> >>>> I switched to a new compiler (Visual Studio 9), and it requires runtime >>>> libraries that can only be installed with an installer. As such, I switched >>>> the entire distribution to an installer based one. >>> >>> >>> Is there a way to make rsyncrypto portable the way it was up to the >>> version 1.06? For me it is OK if I install it on my machine at home, but >>> then I would like to use it also at work where I have no admin rights to >>> install it properly. I try to copy the files from the folder where the >>> rsyncrypto was installed on my local machine, but this cause an execution >>> errors. >>> >>> >>>> Do feel free to compile the program yourself with a compiler that does >>>> not have such strict runtime libraries requirements. >>> >>> >>> I'm afraid that this is bit too much for my skills. I try to compile it >>> using a MinGW package, but it was not successful as it is requires lot of >>> dependent libraries. I try to compile it under Cygwin, but it is bit too >>> much to carry around on the USB stick justo to have the rsyncrypto. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Zax >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, >>> CA >>> -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the >>> Enterprise >>> -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source >>> participation >>> -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: >>> SFAD >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Rsyncrypto-devel mailing list >>> Rsy...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rsyncrypto-devel >>> >>> >> > |
From: Piotr M. <zax...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 13:01:26
|
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:03, Julian Pace Ross <jul...@gm...>wrote: > Don't think it's a good idea... there should just be one version to avoid > confusion. > Maybe with some info on the project web page this could work. :) Regards, Zax |
From: Shachar S. <sh...@sh...> - 2009-02-18 12:44:21
|
Piotr Martyniuk wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:03, Julian Pace Ross > <jul...@gm... <mailto:jul...@gm...>> wrote: > > Don't think it's a good idea... there should just be one version > to avoid confusion. > > > Maybe with some info on the project web page this could work. :) It's a wiki - feel free to add it. Julian, I'll gladly give you upload access to the sourceforge site. Shachar |
From: Julian P. R. <jul...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 12:49:06
|
That would be great... if anything, definitely for the executable... not sure whether you'd want to have two streams of sources to maintain though... In any case I obviously have no problem with uploading the whole lot... On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Shachar Shemesh <sh...@sh...>wrote: > Piotr Martyniuk wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 12:03, Julian Pace Ross < >> jul...@gm... <mailto:jul...@gm...>> wrote: >> >> Don't think it's a good idea... there should just be one version >> to avoid confusion. >> >> >> Maybe with some info on the project web page this could work. :) >> > It's a wiki - feel free to add it. > > Julian, I'll gladly give you upload access to the sourceforge site. > > Shachar > > |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2009-02-18 13:07:31
|
2009/2/18 Julian Pace Ross <jul...@gm...>: > That would be great... if anything, definitely for the executable... not > sure whether you'd want to have two streams of sources to maintain though... > In any case I obviously have no problem with uploading the whole lot... > You can make it a branch but is it really necessary? If the latest source does not build I guess it is a bug that should be fixed, and then all there will be is a MSI binary and a portable binary. Not that I care too much, I personally do not use either binary right now. Thanks Michal |