Re: [Chicken-users] status of the cmake build on win32

[Brandon J. Van Every]

felix winkelmann wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> I have successfully built and run the currentl development version
> in Win98 with MSVC 6.0. 

I'm able to build and install the current Darcs head, using MSVC 7.1.


> A few things that should be noted:
>
> - The library-suffixes used for debug/release/... versions of libchicken
>  are not such a good idea, dynamic loading of extensions requires
>  a distinct name when refering to the runtime library. I had to set
>  the build-type to none (previously I used Debug, which resulted in
>  a linker error).

All MSVC libraries have *.lib as their suffix, whether it's debug, 
release, static, or a dynamic stub.  These need to be disambiguated 
somehow for various purposes.  Postfixes is one way; installing them to 
distinct directories is another.  Either way, Chicken has to know how to 
do something that it is not currently doing.  So what way do you think 
would be easiest to implement and support?  A lot of MSVC developers do 
prefer the directory approach, but this also contributes to "DLL Hell" 
and directory selection errors.  Boost doesn't think it's a good 
practice and explicitly names libraries with all sorts of postfixes for 
all the different permutations.  I think Boost has the right idea as far 
as "industrial strength" programming goes.


> - make uninstall seems to be ineffective.

Hrm.  On my Windows 2000 box, it seems to be partly effective, but 
leaves a lot of stuff behind.


> chicken-setup works fine, but since I don't have tar/gunzip on that
> system, one has to download and extract the eggs manually. 

This reminds me of the need to declare a canonical tar and canonical 
gunzip utility.  The mailing list archives have some stuff about why 
this isn't straightforward. 

I'm too slammed to deal with this right now.  Aside from a new job, 
judging for the Independent Games Festival has begun.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every