[cairo] Re: Cairographics on win32

[Oleg Smolsky]

Hello Carl,

Carl Worth wrote on Thursday, 31 March 2005:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:23:05 +1300, Oleg Smolsky wrote:
>> Cool. I've created a win32 directory that contains cairo.vcproj as
>> well as windows-compatible versions of cairo-features.h, config.h
>> and stdint.h.
> I'm now wondering if we shouldn't put these files into a separate
> directory at the top-level of CVS. Since this patch has hand-modified
> copies of files that are auto-generated by the standard build process,
> I fear they may become out of date and lead to confusion.
Ok, as far as directories and projects go, I'd prefer to keep win32
files in cairo's own directory or a subdirectory. The reason is that I
have 10 projects in my VC++ solution, each one is stored in a
directory, and I can copy/move these projects from one solution to
another. So, I really, really need each project to be a self-contained
moveable directory with relative paths.

As for hand-hacked copies of .h files.... I can see no other way -
everything builds in VC++ from a click of a button, and there are no
dependencies on any 3rd party tools. AFAIK most cross-platform
projects do a similar thing - there is the autoconf building path and
there is a totally separate .vcproj path. I mean I currently have one
IDE+compiler+CPU build target, and therefore have no need for flexible
os/headers/compiler/cpu detection - so, being able to just add a
project and click build is possible for win32 development.

> Yes, the patch is in the right format, and most of it looks just
> fine. Having a custom stdint.h looks pretty creepy to me. Is there
> nothing better to be done there?
> Also, the included copy of stdint.h has either incompatible or at
> least insufficient licensing information attached. But I can supply a
> version with cairo-compatible licensing, I think.
stdint.h - is a C99 thing, and VC++ doesn't have it. So, a copy with
GNU/BSD license that I can hack to suit VC++ types would be nice.

As for the confusion, none of your code would have win32\ in the
include paths, so, IMHO, there is no problem here.

> All we'd need is a name for it. One thing that occurs to me is that
> there is similar motivation for the Debian packaging files which we
> decided to put in packaging/debian. So maybe packaging/win32 ?
As long as it's a subdir of cairo, it doesn't worry me. Say,
packaging/debian and packaging/win32 would be fine.

I've got similar projects for libpixman, so once we have reached the
consensus on naming and location, I'll update my copies and re submit
patches.

Best regards,
Oleg.