Re: [Chicken-users] Windows problems

[felix winkelmann]

On 6/15/05, Krzysztof Kowalczyk <address@hidden> wrote:

> Now I understand that I had to install chicken first i.e. copy chicken
> files to some $chicken-dir and set CHICKEN_DIR=$chicken-dir, but I
> figured this out only after long time.  No documentation I could find
> (files provided with source code or manual/faq on the web page)
> explains how to install chicken on windows.

>From the README:

>>
          For installation just add the CHICKEN directory to your PATH and
set the CHICKEN_HOME
          environment variable (for example in your AUTOEXEC.BAT):

            set PATH=%PATH%;<directory>
            set CHICKEN_HOME=<directory>
<<<

(I agree that this should be more prominent)

> 
> It would also be nice if csc would detect that CHICKEN_HOME is not set
> and display proper error message, e.g.:
> "CHICKEN_HOME environment variable is not set. chicken doesn't seem to
> be properly installed. Please read [$url | INSTALL.windows] for
> instructions on how to install chicken on Windows" and then provide
> the docs under this $url and/or INSTALL.windows file.

Very good idea. I have added this check to csc. Thanks!

> 
> 2. It would be nice if there was an install.bat $path script or
> install target in makefile.vc. I understand that it's just a matter of
> copying some files to a directory where I want to install chicken, but
> being new to chicken I don't know what those files are. And it would
> be so much more convenient if there was a script to do it in the
> distro.

Well, this is understandable, but you can actually just leave the files where
they are and set CHICKEN_HOME. So, technically, there is no installation
step.

> 
> 3. It would be nice if csc driver was smart enough so that I could use
> it build windows programs i.e. just by doing "csc
> examples\hellowin.scm -windows" (vs. writing a custom makefile). For
> that there would have to be a way to specify the libs against which
> progam needs to link directly in scheme source. We could also get rid
> of "-windows" flag if there was a way to specify that within scheme
> source in some way.
> 

Sorry, I don't quite understand. This should normally work. There is a
-windows flag to build GUI apps, and it is intended to link in the
proper libraries. Did that fail?

> 
> 4. This is a weird problem. I also tried building 1.92 using VS 2005
> beta2 and compilation never finishes i.e. it doesn't crash, it doesn't
> kill the system, but it does eats cpu and just spins (I left it
> running overnight and it didn't finish after a couple of hours), while
> compiling the same code using VS 2003 or VS 6 finished fairly quickly.
> 

Looks like a compiler bug. Is it possible to try a newer version of 
VS2005?


cheers,
felix