Re: [Chicken-users] Windows binary manifest

[felix winkelmann]

On 2/7/06, Brandon J. Van Every <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>  I am just wondering if when people make eggs, do they make assumptions
> about Chicken directory structure?  I still don't know much about that.  I
> just don't want Windows "being different" to trip anybody up or get in
> anybody's way.

In fact on Windows it's simpler: you set your CHICKEN_HOME and
CHICKEN_REPOSITORY_PATH, and everything else should just work.
Theoretically...

>  I would say "bundle of HTML."  It seems like there's too much documentation
> for a single HTML sheet.  I know that with HTML, I can always hyperlink
> around to stuff I want to get to.  I don't know if I can do this with PDF or
> not.  I've encountered very few PDF documents that I could actually do this
> with, so that my impression is "I cannot."  Regardless of the truth, that's
> the impression.  Impressions matter when people are fumbling with the docs
> for the 1st time.  Less people will give up if they see something they think
> they know how to navigate.

Right, a bundle it will be, then.

>
>>  Yes. Sometimes it can be convenient to have a static exe without
>> dynamic (DLL) loading issues. And chicken-static should be enough
>> for that case.
>
>  I am confused by you saying "yes" and then saying "chicken-static should be
> enough."  Do you want csi-static.exe?
>

Well, I can be pretty confusing, yes. ;-)
I think a csi-static isn't needed.

BTW, while we're at it, what do you think about:

http://nsis.sourceforge.net/Main_Page


cheers,
felix