You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@subversion.apache.org by Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com> on 2008/07/30 15:00:38 UTC
No respect for Windows?
Okay, so I've noticed that when a new version of SVN is released it takes a
week or more for the windows binaries to become available. Why does it take
so long to get these binaries? openCollab takes just as long. I wanted to
build this myself, but I ended up spending 2 hours trying to get all of the
dependencies together and I still haven't been able to build it.
I'm wondering if someone has a downloadable source distribution of the
latest version of Subversion that is Windows-ready. I want to be able to
download the source and have a visual studio project ready to build it. Or,
a batch file or something that builds it but the dependencies and other hard
work would have already been taken care of.
If I can't have that, then it would be nice to have the Windows binaries the
day of or the day after the official release of a new version of SVN. I'm
hoping that perhaps there are some windows binaries somewhere out there that
I don't know about. One other thing I don't like about the openCollab
release is that they only provide installers, which I don't want. I simply
just want the executable programs.
Help is appreciated.
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Andy Levy <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 13:01, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And, even once you do get a build going, you then have to create a
> > standard Windows Installation package either using InstallShield or
> > Microsoft's MSI -- neither of which are free.
>
> Isn't there at least one free method of creating installation
> packages? http://wix.sourceforge.net/
>
I'm not even proposing that an installer needs to be made. Even just a
simple archive would suffice.
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Andy Levy <an...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 13:01, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And, even once you do get a build going, you then have to create a
> standard Windows Installation package either using InstallShield or
> Microsoft's MSI -- neither of which are free.
Isn't there at least one free method of creating installation
packages? http://wix.sourceforge.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Erik Huelsmann <eh...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:01 PM, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Since Windows represents about 90% of the desktops (and Windows is
>> probably a majority of the desktops even in Open Source shops), it is
>> extremely important for any Open Source project to have a Windows
>> version. There maybe some philosophical differences between people who
>> develop for Open Source and Microsoft, but the best way to kill an
>> Open Source project is to keep it off of Windows. So, why does it
>> sometimes take a bit longer for official Windows versions of Open
>> Source projects like Subversion?
>>
>> Most Linux and Unix distributors scurry to build their own version of
>> open source projects like Subversion for their users while Microsoft
>> itself is usually not interested. So, if RedHat ports of Subversion
>> appear before Windows versions, it could be because Redhat did the
>> work necessary to get the package there.
>>
>> There are other issues involved making Windows ports so difficult. On
>> almost any Linux or Unix distribution, I can pretty much download the
>> source and compile it without any problems because most Unix and Linux
>> distributions are loaded with the standard Open Source dependencies.
>> This is even true with Mac OS X as long as Fink is installed.
>>
>> Windows, on the other hand, doesn't even include a standard C compiler
>> let alone most of the standard Open Source dependencies that
>> Subversion uses. It isn't impossible to get Windows to compile the
>> source, but it does take quite a bit of setup. You have to first get
>> all the dependencies -- some of which don't come with any compiled
>> version of the program. Then, you have to get the GCC compiler.
>>
>> And, even once you do get a build going, you then have to create a
>> standard Windows Installation package either using InstallShield or
>> Microsoft's MSI -- neither of which are free.
>>
>> It isn't impossible to do all of that, but if you want to build
>> Subversion from source on Windows, you really need to setup a Windows
>> machine with all the bells and whistles needed for building open
>> source software. You might want to take a look at MingW
>> <http://www.mingw.org/> or the OSS Win project
>> <http://osswin.sourceforge.net/>.
>
> That's exactly the problem I was trying to solve myself, however I got to
> thinking: Why waste the effort? I'm sure hundreds of people have already
> gone through the effort to set all of this up on windows.
I'd be really surprised if the number of 'home built' Windows
Subversions would be anywhere near 100 excluding the developers (or
even including! Hah!).
Really, I don't think anybody thinks anything else than you do: it's
too damned hard to get the right build environment if you're not an
experienced Windows developer - and even then.
Unfortunately, I've tried to improve the setup and build process, but
it's not that easy: You really cannot assume anything to be available
readily on Windows (like the C compiler)...
> Why don't they
> release a visual studio version of the source distribution so that I can 1)
> Download and 2) Compile. The only reason why it's so difficult on windows is
> because no one has made the effort to make it easy as far as I know.
I'd like to invite you to do it. Others have tried.
> Linux
> is easy right now because all of the hard work has already been done by
> someone else (Such as the distributor of that particular version of Linux).
But also because most Linux distributions include all the tools you'd
want to have for the purpose: make, a C compiler, Python, Perl, awk,
sed, autoconf, and a whole slew of other tools. Does your Windows come
with that?
> Microsoft won't do it obviously, so someone could simply create a ZIP file
> with all of the necessary components so that all I have to do is Download &
> Compile.
I'm affraid nobody is allowed to redistribute the MS toolset.
Bye,
Erik.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:01 PM, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since Windows represents about 90% of the desktops (and Windows is
> probably a majority of the desktops even in Open Source shops), it is
> extremely important for any Open Source project to have a Windows
> version. There maybe some philosophical differences between people who
> develop for Open Source and Microsoft, but the best way to kill an
> Open Source project is to keep it off of Windows. So, why does it
> sometimes take a bit longer for official Windows versions of Open
> Source projects like Subversion?
>
> Most Linux and Unix distributors scurry to build their own version of
> open source projects like Subversion for their users while Microsoft
> itself is usually not interested. So, if RedHat ports of Subversion
> appear before Windows versions, it could be because Redhat did the
> work necessary to get the package there.
>
> There are other issues involved making Windows ports so difficult. On
> almost any Linux or Unix distribution, I can pretty much download the
> source and compile it without any problems because most Unix and Linux
> distributions are loaded with the standard Open Source dependencies.
> This is even true with Mac OS X as long as Fink is installed.
>
> Windows, on the other hand, doesn't even include a standard C compiler
> let alone most of the standard Open Source dependencies that
> Subversion uses. It isn't impossible to get Windows to compile the
> source, but it does take quite a bit of setup. You have to first get
> all the dependencies -- some of which don't come with any compiled
> version of the program. Then, you have to get the GCC compiler.
>
> And, even once you do get a build going, you then have to create a
> standard Windows Installation package either using InstallShield or
> Microsoft's MSI -- neither of which are free.
>
> It isn't impossible to do all of that, but if you want to build
> Subversion from source on Windows, you really need to setup a Windows
> machine with all the bells and whistles needed for building open
> source software. You might want to take a look at MingW
> <http://www.mingw.org/> or the OSS Win project
> <http://osswin.sourceforge.net/>.
That's exactly the problem I was trying to solve myself, however I got to
thinking: Why waste the effort? I'm sure hundreds of people have already
gone through the effort to set all of this up on windows. Why don't they
release a visual studio version of the source distribution so that I can 1)
Download and 2) Compile. The only reason why it's so difficult on windows is
because no one has made the effort to make it easy as far as I know. Linux
is easy right now because all of the hard work has already been done by
someone else (Such as the distributor of that particular version of Linux).
Microsoft won't do it obviously, so someone could simply create a ZIP file
with all of the necessary components so that all I have to do is Download &
Compile.
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Fyodor Sheremetyev <fy...@visualsvn.com>wrote:
> VisualSVN Server 1.5.2 includes Subversion 1.5.1 Windows binaries.
> http://www.visualsvn.com/server/download/
Unfortunately I'm using svnserve, not apache. Yes, I could install it, grab
the binaries, and then uninstall it, but meh... I would rather have a ZIP.
But, I guess this will do for now :(
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Fyodor Sheremetyev <fy...@visualsvn.com>.
VisualSVN Server 1.5.2 includes Subversion 1.5.1 Windows binaries.
http://www.visualsvn.com/server/download/
Fyodor Sheremetyev
VisualSVN Team
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com>.
Since Windows represents about 90% of the desktops (and Windows is
probably a majority of the desktops even in Open Source shops), it is
extremely important for any Open Source project to have a Windows
version. There maybe some philosophical differences between people who
develop for Open Source and Microsoft, but the best way to kill an
Open Source project is to keep it off of Windows. So, why does it
sometimes take a bit longer for official Windows versions of Open
Source projects like Subversion?
Most Linux and Unix distributors scurry to build their own version of
open source projects like Subversion for their users while Microsoft
itself is usually not interested. So, if RedHat ports of Subversion
appear before Windows versions, it could be because Redhat did the
work necessary to get the package there.
There are other issues involved making Windows ports so difficult. On
almost any Linux or Unix distribution, I can pretty much download the
source and compile it without any problems because most Unix and Linux
distributions are loaded with the standard Open Source dependencies.
This is even true with Mac OS X as long as Fink is installed.
Windows, on the other hand, doesn't even include a standard C compiler
let alone most of the standard Open Source dependencies that
Subversion uses. It isn't impossible to get Windows to compile the
source, but it does take quite a bit of setup. You have to first get
all the dependencies -- some of which don't come with any compiled
version of the program. Then, you have to get the GCC compiler.
And, even once you do get a build going, you then have to create a
standard Windows Installation package either using InstallShield or
Microsoft's MSI -- neither of which are free.
It isn't impossible to do all of that, but if you want to build
Subversion from source on Windows, you really need to setup a Windows
machine with all the bells and whistles needed for building open
source software. You might want to take a look at MingW
<http://www.mingw.org/> or the OSS Win project
<http://osswin.sourceforge.net/>.
--
David Weintraub
qazwart@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I do not know why we do not include OpenSSL. We just never have. If
>> you want to build a full server you have always had to download and
>> build Apache separately. It is pretty easy to build Apache with
>> OpenSSL and then just point the Subversion build at the APR, OpenSSL
>> and ZLib you used when building Apache.
>
> Is Apache really required if I only plan on using svnserve?
No, but building svnserve is easy and does not require OpenSSL. So I
assumed Apache. That said, in my experience it is a bitch to build
APR correctly on Windows. If you just build Apache you can let it
build APR and use the output.
>> It definitely does not do that.
>
>
> If you look at the batch file build\win32\vc6-build.bat, it can't possibly
> work without it being in C:\SVN. To make it work, you have to change lots of
> batch script code that you shouldn't have to change. Am I missing something
> if this is not true?
The script is an attempt to show an example of how you could automate
the process. It is not really maintained either and likely does not
reflect the latest versions of dependencies and likely even all of the
options you can pass to gen-make.py.
I'd suggest looking at the scripts used by the Windows buildbot.
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/tools/buildbot/slaves/
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I do not know why we do not include OpenSSL. We just never have. If
> you want to build a full server you have always had to download and
> build Apache separately. It is pretty easy to build Apache with
> OpenSSL and then just point the Subversion build at the APR, OpenSSL
> and ZLib you used when building Apache.
Is Apache really required if I only plan on using svnserve?
> It definitely does not do that.
If you look at the batch file build\win32\vc6-build.bat, it can't possibly
work without it being in C:\SVN. To make it work, you have to change lots of
batch script code that you shouldn't have to change. Am I missing something
if this is not true?
Thanks for helping out, I appreciate it.
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> CollabNet does not release its binaries until it has completed
>> certification on them and that process cannot start until the release
>> has happened.
>>
>> There are no binaries posted on tigris for any OS but Windows, so it
>> is hard to justify the argument that Windows does not get any respect.
>>
>> Subversion already posts a Windows-ready source distribution (the zip
>> file). The issue with building Subversion on Windows is that you need
>> a bunch of tool setup before you can build it. Once that is done
>> once, build is fairly simple.
>
> I actually downloaded the ZIP but it didn't have any of the dependencies
> required to build SVN for servers. I had to download OpenSSL, and also the
> dependencies ZIP.
I do not know why we do not include OpenSSL. We just never have. If
you want to build a full server you have always had to download and
build Apache separately. It is pretty easy to build Apache with
OpenSSL and then just point the Subversion build at the APR, OpenSSL
and ZLib you used when building Apache.
> Plus configuring it is confusing, since it expects it to
> be in C:\SVN.
It definitely does not do that.
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> CollabNet does not release its binaries until it has completed
> certification on them and that process cannot start until the release
> has happened.
>
> There are no binaries posted on tigris for any OS but Windows, so it
> is hard to justify the argument that Windows does not get any respect.
>
> Subversion already posts a Windows-ready source distribution (the zip
> file). The issue with building Subversion on Windows is that you need
> a bunch of tool setup before you can build it. Once that is done
> once, build is fairly simple.
I actually downloaded the ZIP but it didn't have any of the dependencies
required to build SVN for servers. I had to download OpenSSL, and also the
dependencies ZIP. Plus configuring it is confusing, since it expects it to
be in C:\SVN.
Re: No respect for Windows?
Posted by Mark Phippard <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Robert Dailey <rc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, so I've noticed that when a new version of SVN is released it takes a
> week or more for the windows binaries to become available. Why does it take
> so long to get these binaries? openCollab takes just as long. I wanted to
> build this myself, but I ended up spending 2 hours trying to get all of the
> dependencies together and I still haven't been able to build it.
>
> I'm wondering if someone has a downloadable source distribution of the
> latest version of Subversion that is Windows-ready. I want to be able to
> download the source and have a visual studio project ready to build it. Or,
> a batch file or something that builds it but the dependencies and other hard
> work would have already been taken care of.
>
> If I can't have that, then it would be nice to have the Windows binaries the
> day of or the day after the official release of a new version of SVN. I'm
> hoping that perhaps there are some windows binaries somewhere out there that
> I don't know about. One other thing I don't like about the openCollab
> release is that they only provide installers, which I don't want. I simply
> just want the executable programs.
CollabNet does not release its binaries until it has completed
certification on them and that process cannot start until the release
has happened.
There are no binaries posted on tigris for any OS but Windows, so it
is hard to justify the argument that Windows does not get any respect.
Subversion already posts a Windows-ready source distribution (the zip
file). The issue with building Subversion on Windows is that you need
a bunch of tool setup before you can build it. Once that is done
once, build is fairly simple.
--
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org