binarycloud-dev

[binarycloud-dev] platforms and makefiles

[alex b. <en...@tu...>]

hi all,

The makefile system is coming along nicely, but I thought it would be
relevant to bring up some important issues:

Right now, the makefile system is 100% unix. It uses tools available on most
standard bsd and linux distros, and generally relies on the standard set of
unix tools available from those OSs.

I know there are a few people on here using Windows, and I wanted to give
you all the heads up that the first revs of the makefile system will not
support windows at all. I'm 100% open to contributions in this category, if
anyone wants to take our makefile system and provide patches to make it all
work on the dos command line, I'm happy to include those in the distro: but
all core development work is done on linux, and all of the other little
useful utilities like the release and promote scripts assume a unix
environment. (I was amazed that the r1 release functioned just fine out of
the box on windows, so maybe the job of getting the makefiles to work on win
is not such a big deal)
--------

best,

_alex

RE: [binarycloud-dev] platforms and makefiles

[Andreas A. <a.a...@th...>]

Hi,

> I know there are a few people on here using Windows, and I wanted to give
> you all the heads up that the first revs of the makefile system will not
> support windows at all.
I would not support windows "natively" ist overloading the code, but I
realize that it should work under windows as well. One solution would be
providing a contributed "make-tool-distro" for win. But there are some tools
that provide unix functionality under windoze with more or less effort.

Basically there is the SfU (microsoft ervices for unix) providing a shell
and some common unix commands.

Cygwin is also out there and it provides many gnu programs like bash, make,
bison etc.

MKS Toolkit is another commercial variant especially for developers.

And there is VMWare. You could install linux on vmware and use it as the
serverbox for running make (ok, you need a very faaaaaast machine). Ok thats
much overhead for just a "make". But you might also use it to test the
application on unix browsers, if you did not set up a dedicated linux box.

Andi

Re[2]: [binarycloud-dev] platforms and makefiles

[Gokhan T. <mir...@tr...>]

Hi all,

It's depend on who you are and what you wanna do :=)

Scenarios;
1. A home developer with single machine. Got no chance and the
solution that you offered is seems good. But typically i believe that
the BC project covers more professional issues.

Therefore scenario 2.

You are a developer in a office and you have one Linuz server machine
and several Win boxes to manage your life.

We know that what a pitty but still xwindow platforms are not too much
stable. What a shame everything rest of the Linuz system is like a
strong German shoe but the frontside is still needs care for end users :=)

If this is the case, you have chance to do anything with server.
It's up to you. I strongly recommend to anybody Putty. Small efficient
way of Telnet and SSH connections. Also we got TCL, SSH for win,
XClient and others.

Now the phenomenon is we should test the things on windoze because we
have 80 percent of www users will come from win machines (IE world).
Netscape, Opera, Konqueror is good to test of course but we should be
realistic. Everybody want to use the things easily, without too many
errors. Netscape handles all elements of the document carefully and
reject the whitespaces, bad table definitions etc. So what?
And if we want to stay in linuz world why we follow Microstylish xml rulez?
I know from my colleagues that they typically use win boxes and do
final tests on Linuz machines.

Last word, i'd like to use any toolz regardless of the source if comes
useful by looking from the programmer angle. So, we need windoze too.

Cheers,


Gokhan

Re: Re[2]: [binarycloud-dev] platforms and makefiles

[Alex B. <en...@tu...>]

> 1. A home developer with single machine. Got no chance and the
> solution that you offered is seems good. But typically i believe that
> the BC project covers more professional issues.

correct.

> Therefore scenario 2.
> 
> You are a developer in a office and you have one Linuz server machine
> and several Win boxes to manage your life.

right.

> We know that what a pitty but still xwindow platforms are not too much
> stable. What a shame everything rest of the Linuz system is like a
> strong German shoe but the frontside is still needs care for end users :=)
> 
> If this is the case, you have chance to do anything with server.
> It's up to you. I strongly recommend to anybody Putty. Small efficient
> way of Telnet and SSH connections. Also we got TCL, SSH for win,
> XClient and others.
> 
> Now the phenomenon is we should test the things on windoze because we
> have 80 percent of www users will come from win machines (IE world).
> Netscape, Opera, Konqueror is good to test of course but we should be
> realistic. Everybody want to use the things easily, without too many
> errors. Netscape handles all elements of the document carefully and
> reject the whitespaces, bad table definitions etc. So what?
> And if we want to stay in linuz world why we follow Microstylish xml rulez?
> I know from my colleagues that they typically use win boxes and do
> final tests on Linuz machines.

Coorrect.

> Last word, i'd like to use any toolz regardless of the source if comes
> useful by looking from the programmer angle. So, we need windoze too.

Well, but there's a difference from allowing developers to edit code on
windows (which is fine, of course) and actually running a server
installation on windows (which I don't intend to support directly - though
again I'm open to contributions/patches to make the system work on win - so
long as we don't have to have any ugly hacks.

_a


--
alex black, ceo
en...@tu...

the turing studio, inc.
http://www.turingstudio.com

vox+510.666.0074
fax+510.666.0093