From: <xde...@fr...> - 2007-04-27 13:55:59
|
Hi everybody, I just created a NSIS script for easy installation of swig-1.3.31 on Windows. In case some of the maintainers are interested, I can put it in the source repository. Regards. |
From: William S F. <ws...@fu...> - 2007-04-29 20:56:19
|
Xavier Décoret wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I just created a NSIS script for easy installation of swig-1.3.31 on > Windows. In case some of the maintainers are interested, I can put it in > the source repository. > What does it offer other than what we currently do ... unzip the files into a directory? If it installs it into the "Program Files" directory, is it possible to still run the test-suite, build the examples, rebuild SWIG etc from the commandline? A real bonus of using an installer on Windows would be for it to detect all the versions of Ruby, Java, C#, Python etc etc, then configure the examples so that they run without having to set any environment variables. Can it do this? Thanks William |
From: <xde...@fr...> - 2007-04-30 08:11:38
|
William S Fulton a écrit : > Xavier Décoret wrote: > >> Hi everybody, >> >> I just created a NSIS script for easy installation of swig-1.3.31 on >> Windows. In case some of the maintainers are interested, I can put it in >> the source repository. >> >> > > What does it offer other than what we currently do ... unzip the files > The ZIP file is perfect and I personnally used this approach. I unzip the file in a directory in Program Files, add the path to my PATH variable. Then I open an explorer and browse through the directory Doc/Manual/index.html, then create a bookmark in my browser. And I am done. That's nothing indeed ;-). Seriously, during the dev. and testing of many wonderful libraries (that I was evangelizing to my fellow programmers) I noticed that many people tend to boycot (or not give a try to) libraries that does not come with an easy installation process. Under Linux, it means a .rpm or .deb (even the cool configure/make/make install is considered too complex by many, especially when it must be deployed on a parc of machines). Under Windows, it must be a double-click installer, with an easy way to uninstall the programm if you do not like it. I know. This is just marketing. But try to install a MinGW and you'll understand why many people go Cygwin instead ;-). > into a directory? If it installs it into the "Program Files" directory, > is it possible to still run the test-suite, build the examples, rebuild > SWIG etc from the commandline? A real bonus of using an installer on > Windows would be for it to detect all the versions of Ruby, Java, C#, > Python etc etc, then configure the examples so that they run without > having to set any environment variables. Can it do this? > The installer simply install things in a proper directory, create a Start menu entry with a link to the examples and the doc, as well as a "uninstall" entry. And it adds the swig path to the PATH variable, either for all users or for the current user only. So you can run swig from the command line. Yes it could detect what version of PYTHON, etc. is installed and set the env. variables accordingly. Currently, I have not added it. I could also add automatic detection of Visual and add a Custom Build Tool wizard. I might do it in the future if some people are interested. The point of my initial mail is that I can either maintain the installer on my own, or work with the community, so that it appears on the official webpage, and so that I don't go a stupid way because I missed some points about swig's principles. Thanks for you remarks, X. > Thanks > William > |
From: William S F. <ws...@fu...> - 2007-05-09 19:57:10
|
Xavier Décoret wrote: > William S Fulton a écrit : >> Xavier Décoret wrote: >> >>> Hi everybody, >>> >>> I just created a NSIS script for easy installation of swig-1.3.31 on >>> Windows. In case some of the maintainers are interested, I can put it >>> in the source repository. >>> >>> >> >> What does it offer other than what we currently do ... unzip the files >> > The ZIP file is perfect and I personnally used this approach. I unzip > the file in a directory in Program Files, add the path to my PATH > variable. Then I open an explorer and browse through the directory > Doc/Manual/index.html, then create a bookmark in my browser. And I am > done. That's nothing indeed ;-). > > Seriously, during the dev. and testing of many wonderful libraries (that > I was evangelizing to my fellow programmers) I noticed that many people > tend to boycot (or not give a try to) libraries that does not come with > an easy installation process. Under Linux, it means a .rpm or .deb (even > the cool configure/make/make install is considered too complex by many, > especially when it must be deployed on a parc of machines). Under > Windows, it must be a double-click installer, with an easy way to > uninstall the programm if you do not like it. > > I know. This is just marketing. But try to install a MinGW and you'll > understand why many people go Cygwin instead ;-). >> into a directory? If it installs it into the "Program Files" directory, >> is it possible to still run the test-suite, build the examples, rebuild >> SWIG etc from the commandline? A real bonus of using an installer on >> Windows would be for it to detect all the versions of Ruby, Java, C#, >> Python etc etc, then configure the examples so that they run without >> having to set any environment variables. Can it do this? >> > The installer simply install things in a proper directory, create a > Start menu entry with a link to the examples and the doc, as well as a > "uninstall" entry. And it adds the swig path to the PATH variable, > either for all users or for the current user only. So you can run swig > from the command line. > Yes it could detect what version of PYTHON, etc. is installed and set > the env. variables accordingly. Currently, I have not added it. I could > also add automatic detection of Visual and add a Custom Build Tool > wizard. I might do it in the future if some people are interested. > > The point of my initial mail is that I can either maintain the installer > on my own, or work with the community, so that it appears on the > official webpage, and so that I don't go a stupid way because I missed > some points about swig's principles. > Sorry for delayed response. If you are interested in making an installer that adds value compared to the unzip approach then I think it would be worthwhile to replace the unzip 'installation' approach we currently have. If you'd like to develop the installer using the subversion facilities, let me know and I'll get you svn access. When the installer provides useful features such as running the examples without any user intervention then we can consider shipping it. I believe CMake has some facilities for doing this. William |