[cairo] Re: Cairographics on win32

[Carl Worth]

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 09:21:49 +1200, Oleg Smolsky wrote:
> 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.

Would you be happy if the new module (packaging/msvc ?) included your
new files as well as all of the cairo source code? And those two could
be arranged in whatever directories you'd like relative to each
other. I think that should be easy enough to arrange.

It occurs to me that "packaging" is a rather unfortunate name for
toplevel checkouts from cvs, as it will by default give you a
directory name with no name element that is specific to cairo.

> > 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.

Actually, I think the right thing to do in this case might be to just
add a block something like the following:

typedef signed char int8_t;
typedef short int16_t;
typedef long int32_t;
typedef long long int64_t;
typedef unsigned char uint8_t;
typedef unsigned short uint16_t;
typedef unsigned long uint32_t;
typedef unsigned long long uint64_t;

along with the appropriate win32/i386/msvc-specific protection,
directly into the block in cairoint.h where we already have other
OS-specific protection to include inttypes.h or stdint.h.

I don't think we use much from stdint.h beyond the types listed above,
if anything.

> > 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.

Well, the Debian people really wanted a directory outside of the cairo
tree. So the current packaging/debian is next to cairo, not inside of
it.

I'd prefer that the packaging stuff lived inside the tree, (I know
that if I were maintaining the Debian stuff that that's where I would
put it). And that avoids the awkward naming I referred to above. But
I'm not going to make the Debian maintainers do something they don't
want.

So, let's make a new packaging directory inside of cairo, and let's
put your stuff under that. To me packaging/msvc makes more sense than
packaging/win32 since it is already possible to use the "official"
build stuff on win32. (Unless you'd prefer packaging/win32/msvc or
something).

> 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.

Thanks. Try cairo/packaging/msvc if that sounds good to you.

-Carl
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/cairo/attachments/20050330/c2dc8aaa/attachment.pgp