Hello At 21/04/2004 15:13, Paul Reeves wrote: >On Wednesday 21 April 2004 14:26, Blas Rodriguez Somoza wrote: > > >>>1/ There is absolutely no need to have compiler specific InnoSetup > > >>>install scripts for Firebird. In fact the install script has nothing > > >>> to do with the compiler used. It is location dependant, not > > >>> compiler dependant. > > >> > > >>False, the install script is compiler dependent. > > > > > >Hmm, it is now for MinGW, but it shouldn't be. > > > > The change is in the win32 InnoSetup and not related with MinGW, it was > > previously compiler independent and MinGW uses it, but someone change > > it and now it requires VisualStudio installed. > > > >It has always been written on the assumption that it is installing >binaries built via Visual Studio 6. Support has been added for VS7. I >don't see any major difficulties in adding support for other compilers. > >There is not, as far as I'm aware, any dependancy on a particular >compiler, beyond the need to ensure that libraries linked to during the >build are included in the installer. > > > > >>Do you say the script is not in the the HEAD or that it is in another > > >> place?. > > > > > >It is where it always was - which is now only reachable via the > > >B1_5_Release tag. > > > > In the HEAD is in firebird2/builds/install/arch-specific/win32 > > > >This is hopelessly out of date. > > > Different opinions. Each time I execute the fbtcs tests I also make a > > full build including the installer, because I also want to test the > > installer. > >In that case you have been testing a very old version. > >Surely it is far better to discuss these things first than to blunder >around making copies of old versions just because they don't work for >you? I tell months ago to Olivier Mascia that the installer is broken in the HEAD and he answer that will talk with you to solve the issue, so I suppose you know that and you don't have the time or the intention to solve the problem. The installer in the HEAD don't work even for msvc, not for me. Perhaps when the HEAD installer works again it could be used for the MinGW build (again). >As for the Win32 install code - conceptually you need to see files in the >B1_5_Release as the HEAD, not the other way round. The branch files will >be backported to HEAD when the time comes. I don't want to see anything >go into HEAD that hasn't first been through B1_5_Release. What? >Anyway, if you are really keen to do testing I would prefer it if you >concentrated on the Fb 1.5 branch. Building and testing HEAD is not a >priority. OK you have explained your preferences and priorities, but mine are different, and of course I expend my time according to mine. Anyway I could give you some reasons why I do testing on the HEAD and not in 1.5 I don't test the 1.5 branch because: - Its isql is broken in a way that makes impossible to do platform-independent testing as I discover when I develop the fbtcs suite. I could not repair isql in 1.5 because when I finish fbtcs and publish it (Oct 2003) the 1.5 version is in RC state and changes theoretically blocked excluded critical ones. According to some problems I found with fbtcs its seems nobody run the old tcs tests against 1.5 in the year before 1.5 is delivered. - 1.5 is out and testing now is done by users which is a harder test than those available in the test suite at this moment. And I test the HEAD because - Testing should be done continuously, not when or after a new version is delivered. - If the testing is not done frequently, newly introduced bugs will be detected months after it was created and usually with a lot more effort than it was needed in the bug is detected short after it was introduced. - A working and tested HEAD is needed by the people working on it and by those who want to test new functionalities. >Paul >-- >Paul Reeves >http://www.ibphoenix.com >Supporting users of Firebird and InterBase Regards Blas Rodriguez Somoza |