Thread: wxWindows Build
I should point out (perhaps as I should have before) that the 2003-06-07 CVS tree of wxWindows does not build on Mac OS X. That should be reason enough to upgrade the CVS tree. ahp
> I should point out (perhaps as I should have before) that the 2003-06-07 > CVS tree of wxWindows does not build on Mac OS X. That should be reason > enough to upgrade the CVS tree. > > ahp > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > > Neither does the 2003-06-18 build, for that matter. Try a different day. :-( ahp
> -----Original Message----- > From: fmonkey@fmonkey.net [mailto:fmonkey@fmonkey.net] > Sent: 26 June 2003 02:38 > To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > I should point out (perhaps as I should have before) that the > 2003-06-07 CVS tree of wxWindows does not build on Mac OS X. > That should be reason enough to upgrade the CVS tree. > OK, is there a newe[r|st] one that does? Regards, Dave.
Dave Page wrote:
ahp
Damned if I know. I tried a few last night, and had problems with all of them. The program builds, but the include files are screwed up, so I couldn't build anything against wxWindows. I will keep trying to find a good one.-----Original Message----- From: fmonkey@fmonkey.net [mailto:fmonkey@fmonkey.net] Sent: 26 June 2003 02:38 To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build I should point out (perhaps as I should have before) that the 2003-06-07 CVS tree of wxWindows does not build on Mac OS X. That should be reason enough to upgrade the CVS tree.OK, is there a newe[r|st] one that does? Regards, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
ahp
-----Original Message-----
From: Adam H. Pendleton [mailto:fmonkey@fmonkey.net]
Sent: 26 June 2003 13:48
To: Dave Page
Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows BuildDamned if I know. I tried a few last night, and had problems with all of them. The program builds, but the include files are screwed up, so I couldn't build anything against wxWindows. I will keep trying to find a good one.
Yeuch. Have we completely removed the 2.4 target now? How about the Mac port is non-Unicode only for now?
Regards, Dave.
Dave Page wrote:
ahp
Yeuch. Have we completely removed the 2.4 target now? How about the Mac port is non-Unicode only for now?
Regards, Dave.
Not sure what you mean here. Do you mean can we stil use wxMac 2.4? I have no idea; I don't know why the requirement for wxWindows 2.5 exists. I always assumed pgAdmin3 used some feature of wxWindows that required 2.5. If that's not the case, I will happily move back to 2.4. If Unicode support is the only reason to use 2.5, then sure, we can support a non-Unicode Mac version, for know. Whatever the solution, let me know what you decide. Right now I am trying to solve the QB and Mac problems, so that we can have them ready when we release.ahp
-----Original Message-----Dave Page wrote:
From: Adam H. Pendleton [mailto:fmonkey@fmonkey.net]
Sent: 26 June 2003 16:04
To: Dave Page
Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build
Yeuch. Have we completely removed the 2.4 target now? How about the Mac port is non-Unicode only for now?
Regards, Dave.
Not sure what you mean here. Do you mean can we stil use wxMac 2.4? I have no idea; I don't know why the requirement for wxWindows 2.5 exists. I always assumed pgAdmin3 used some feature of wxWindows that required 2.5. If that's not the case, I will happily move back to 2.4. If Unicode support is the only reason to use 2.5, then sure, we can support a non-Unicode Mac version, for know. Whatever the solution, let me know what you decide. Right now I am trying to solve the QB and Mac problems, so that we can have them ready when we release.
Hi Adam,
As far as I am aware it is just the Unicode support that we use 2.5 for. BTW, when I can persuade it to install, I should have a FreeBSD 5.1 box to play with - albeit a pretty slow one!
Regards, Dave
Dave Page wrote: > As far as I am aware it is just the Unicode support that we use 2.5 for. Nope. The dialog metrics are vastly improved in 2.5, so gtk really looks the same as win32. Most strings won't fit in gtk if 2.4 if used, the fonts are really messed up. Still, I wonder about this version discussion. AFAIR we simply have --with-wx, and evaluate the version that's stored there. Regards, Andreas
> -----Original Message----- > From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:Andreas.Pflug@web.de] > Sent: 27 June 2003 21:45 > To: Dave Page > Cc: Adam H. Pendleton; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > Dave Page wrote: > > > As far as I am aware it is just the Unicode support that we use 2.5 > > for. > > Nope. > > The dialog metrics are vastly improved in 2.5, so gtk really > looks the > same as win32. Most strings won't fit in gtk if 2.4 if used, > the fonts > are really messed up. > > Still, I wonder about this version discussion. AFAIR we simply have > --with-wx, and evaluate the version that's stored there. Another point of note - from the reply Raphael got from his Debian packager friend it sounds like the wx CVS is currently being turned upside-down whilst they reorganise the structure. Looks like we're stuck with 2003-06-07. Regards, Dave.
Dave Page wrote: > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:Andreas.Pflug@web.de] >>Sent: 27 June 2003 21:45 >>To: Dave Page >>Cc: Adam H. Pendleton; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org >>Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build >> >> >>Dave Page wrote: >> >> >> >>>As far as I am aware it is just the Unicode support that we use 2.5 >>>for. >>> >>> >>Nope. >> >>The dialog metrics are vastly improved in 2.5, so gtk really >>looks the >>same as win32. Most strings won't fit in gtk if 2.4 if used, >>the fonts >>are really messed up. >> >>Still, I wonder about this version discussion. AFAIR we simply have >>--with-wx, and evaluate the version that's stored there. >> >> > >Another point of note - from the reply Raphael got from his Debian >packager friend it sounds like the wx CVS is currently being turned >upside-down whilst they reorganise the structure. > >Looks like we're stuck with 2003-06-07. > > > We need our own version at the moment, which may be based on 2003-06-07 or 2003-06-18, and has the additional wxString patch to support that's still open. Regards, Andreas
It's rumoured that Andreas Pflug once said: > We need our own version at the moment, which may be based on 2003-06-07 > or 2003-06-18, and has the additional wxString patch to support that's > still open. Shal we go with the later one then if we know it's good, and stick a patched tarball on Snake? Regards, Dave
Hi all, ----Message d'origine---- >Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 00:09:57 +0200 >De: Andreas Pflug <Andreas.Pflug@web.de> >A: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> >Copie à: "Adam H. Pendleton" <fmonkey@fmonkey.net>, >Sujet: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > >Dave Page wrote: >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:Andreas.Pflug@web.de] >>>Sent: 27 June 2003 21:45 >>>To: Dave Page >>>Cc: Adam H. Pendleton; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org >>>Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build >>>Dave Page wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>As far as I am aware it is just the Unicode support that we use 2.5 >>>>for. >>>> >>>> >>>Nope. >>> >>>The dialog metrics are vastly improved in 2.5, so gtk really >>>looks the >>>same as win32. Most strings won't fit in gtk if 2.4 if used, >>>the fonts >>>are really messed up. >>> >>>Still, I wonder about this version discussion. AFAIR we simply have >>>--with-wx, and evaluate the version that's stored there. >> >>Another point of note - from the reply Raphael got from his Debian >>packager friend it sounds like the wx CVS is currently being turned >>upside-down whilst they reorganise the structure. >> >>Looks like we're stuck with 2003-06-07. >> >We need our own version at the moment, which may be based on 2003-06-07 >or 2003-06-18, and has the additional wxString patch to support that's >still open. here is what I'm planning to do concerning debian packages release and this wxWindows 2.5 "problem" : Woody debian stable release : as this the official release, we won't be able to integrate new software in it... So, I thinkwe can release a package for this release (on snake) with a link on our own wx 2.5 package (I won't integrate wxPythonwhich seems to be THE real problem at this time... pgadmin3 has nothing to do with it (?) ). These debian packageswill be "aptable" from snake and its mirrors but no official debian repository. Testing and Unstable : we are obliged for the moment to link without unicode support and against wxWindows 2.4 + GTK 1.2if we want to be able to integrate official debian repository. Ron Lee who is responsible of wxWindows debian packageswill surely release a cvs snapshot package of 2.5 and I've asked him if it is possible to integrate unicode support. Experimental : here we can do about everything we want, so I I'll produce a wxWindows 2.5 with gtk2 and unicode in it specificto pgadmin3. Any suggestions concerning this is welcome! best, Raphaël
Dave Page wrote:
>It's rumoured that Andreas Pflug once said:
>
>
>
>>We need our own version at the moment, which may be based on 2003-06-07
>> or 2003-06-18, and has the additional wxString patch to support that's
>> still open.
>>
>>
>
>Shal we go with the later one then if we know it's good, and stick a
>patched tarball on Snake?
>Regards, Dave
>
>
Yes, and apply the patch appended to this mail.
Regards,
Andreas
Index: string.cpp
===================================================================
RCS file: /pack/cvsroots/wxwindows/wxWindows/src/common/string.cpp,v
retrieving revision 1.174
diff -c -r1.174 string.cpp
*** string.cpp 2003/06/15 19:33:04 1.174
--- string.cpp 2003/06/28 08:28:27
***************
*** 264,272 ****
}
// MB2WC wants the buffer size, not the string length
! if ( conv.MB2WC(m_pchData, psz, nLen + 1) != (size_t)-1 )
{
// initialized ok
m_pchData[nLen] = 0;
return;
}
--- 264,275 ----
}
// MB2WC wants the buffer size, not the string length
! nLen = conv.MB2WC(m_pchData, psz, nLen);
!
! if (nLen != (size_t)-1 )
{
// initialized ok
+ GetStringData()->nDataLength = nLen;
m_pchData[nLen] = 0;
return;
}
Hi Raphaël, > -----Original Message----- > From: blacknoz@club-internet.fr [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr] > Sent: 28 June 2003 11:20 > To: Andreas.Pflug@web.de > Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > here is what I'm planning to do concerning debian packages > release and this wxWindows 2.5 "problem" : > > Woody debian stable release : as this the official release, > we won't be able to integrate new software in it... So, I > think we can release a package for this release (on snake) > with a link on our own wx 2.5 package (I won't integrate > wxPython which seems to be THE real problem at this time... > pgadmin3 has nothing to do with it (?) ). These debian > packages will be "aptable" from snake and its mirrors but no > official debian repository. OK. I will (time allowing), add a patched wx2.5 tarball to Snake for use as our 'supported' version. Due to the changes inwx, we should probably stick with this version (fixing any bugs we find ourselves) until 2.5 is formally released. SoundOK? wxPython is a non-issue. We only use it for running XRCed (the XRC dialogue editor), and that uses wxPython 2.3on my system. > Testing and Unstable : we are obliged for the moment to link > without unicode support and against wxWindows 2.4 + GTK 1.2 > if we want to be able to integrate official debian > repository. Ron Lee who is responsible of wxWindows debian > packages will surely release a cvs snapshot package of 2.5 > and I've asked him if it is possible to integrate unicode support. This probably won't wrk with the current build system which we (well, Adam) recently ripped 2.4 support out of. I don't believeadding a simple 2.4 option will be a problem however - I will look at it tomorrow (again, time allowing). > Experimental : here we can do about everything we want, so I > I'll produce a wxWindows 2.5 with gtk2 and unicode in it > specific to pgadmin3. Sounds like a plan to me. I will create an account on Snake for you to upload your work to so you are not dependent on anyof us. Regards, Dave.
Hi Dave, Dave Page wrote: >OK. I will (time allowing), add a patched wx2.5 tarball to Snake for use as our 'supported' version. Due to the changesin wx, we should probably stick with this version (fixing any bugs we find ourselves) until 2.5 is formally released.Sound OK? wxPython is a non-issue. We only use it for running XRCed (the XRC dialogue editor), and that uses wxPython2.3 on my system. > >>Testing and Unstable : we are obliged for the moment to link >>without unicode support and against wxWindows 2.4 + GTK 1.2 >>if we want to be able to integrate official debian >>repository. Ron Lee who is responsible of wxWindows debian >>packages will surely release a cvs snapshot package of 2.5 >>and I've asked him if it is possible to integrate unicode support. >> >> >This probably won't wrk with the current build system which we (well, Adam) recently ripped 2.4 support out of. I don'tbelieve adding a simple 2.4 option will be a problem however - I will look at it tomorrow (again, time allowing). > >>Experimental : here we can do about everything we want, so I >>I'll produce a wxWindows 2.5 with gtk2 and unicode in it >>specific to pgadmin3. >> >> >Sounds like a plan to me. I will create an account on Snake for you to upload your work to so you are not dependent on anyof us. > Ok, many things have changed since this mail... Ron Lee contacted me today concerning my intention to upload some wxwindows 2.5 package into debian 'experimental' : he totally disagree with this. He told me once again that he will release an official snapshot as soon as it will be more stable.... That's for the bad news. Good news, he is planning to build 2.5/2.6 of wxWindows with unicode and gtk2 support... So we won't have to do the job for this in future release. :) Here is my new "plan" : may be it's too early to upload pgadmin3 to the official debian repository (I'll keep on trying building against wxWindows 2.4, which works well for me for the moment... I mean that my package do build on it about two days ago). I'am now building some wxWindows 2.5 packages based on checkout of the CVS 2003-06-18 (it should be this one unless I did some mistake in cvs line...) and I patched them with the string.cpp from Andreas Pflug : these packages are quite the same as Jean-Michel's one and are called : pgadmin3-libwxgtk2ud2.5-contrib_2.5-20030618_i386.deb pgadmin3-libwxgtk2ud2.5-dev_2.5-20030618_i386.deb pgadmin3-libwxgtk2ud2.5_2.5-20030618_i386.deb Please tell me when your patched tarball will be available so that I build packages with it. They are static (no more shared) libraries and headers needed to build pgadmin3. I prefixed package's name with 'pgadmin3' so to be sure there won't be a clash with future official debian packages names. These packages should not be installed unless you want to do some development on pgadmin3. I now build pgadmin3 linked statically against these versions of wxWindows (just as Jean-Michel's does with RPMS). As I think we can't integrate debian for the moment, we don't need to be fully compliant with its policy.... As soon as some official debian packages will be available that permit a good integration of pgadmin3 I will go to some more compliant build. As I said in the mail before, any suggestions are welcome. Dave, thank you for the account, don't hesitate to contact me if you need some information. Another thing : I need to know the "upstream author" to complete the package form from debian, who shall I write down ? you ? pgadmin development team ? and which email ? yours or pgadmin-hackers ? best, Raphaël
> -----Original Message----- > From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:Andreas.Pflug@web.de] > Sent: 28 June 2003 09:40 > To: Dave Page > Cc: fmonkey@fmonkey.net; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org; jm@poure.com > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > Dave Page wrote: > > >It's rumoured that Andreas Pflug once said: > > > > > > > >>We need our own version at the moment, which may be based on > >>2003-06-07 or 2003-06-18, and has the additional wxString patch to > >>support that's still open. > >> > >> > > > >Shal we go with the later one then if we know it's good, and stick a > >patched tarball on Snake? Regards, Dave > > > > > Yes, and apply the patch appended to this mail. It's not on the wx site any more - can you email a copy of ftp it to Snake please? Regards, Dave
On Monday 30 June 2003 11:08, Dave Page wrote: > It's not on the wx site any more - can you email a copy of ftp it to > Snake please? Do you mean it cannot be fetched using CVS? Cheers, Jean-Michel
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jm.poure@freesurf.fr] > Sent: 30 June 2003 10:21 > To: Dave Page; Andreas Pflug > Cc: fmonkey@fmonkey.net; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > On Monday 30 June 2003 11:08, Dave Page wrote: > > It's not on the wx site any more - can you email a copy of > ftp it to > > Snake please? > > Do you mean it cannot be fetched using CVS? > Cheers, Jean-Michel Probably if i new the time/timezone at which it was created. There may also be some bootstraps to run before it's usable and I don't know what that is. Regards, Dave.
On Monday 30 June 2003 11:23, Dave Page wrote: > Probably if i new the time/timezone at which it was created. There may > also be some bootstraps to run before it's usable and I don't know what > that is. A simple "autoconf" should suffice as explained in the wxWindows docs. I will have a try later today, after I finish some ongoing work, in order to upgrade the existing RPMs. Cheers, Jean-Michel
> -----Original Message----- > From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz@club-internet.fr] > Sent: 29 June 2003 23:19 > To: Dave Page > Cc: Andreas.Pflug@web.de; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > Here is my new "plan" : > may be it's too early to upload pgadmin3 to the official debian > repository (I'll keep on trying building against wxWindows 2.4, which > works well for me for the moment... I mean that my package do > build on > it about two days ago). > I'am now building some wxWindows 2.5 packages based on > checkout of the > CVS 2003-06-18 (it should be this one unless I did some > mistake in cvs > line...) and I patched them with the string.cpp from Andreas Pflug : > these packages are quite the same as Jean-Michel's one and > are called : pgadmin3-libwxgtk2ud2.5-contrib_2.5-20030618_i386.deb > pgadmin3-libwxgtk2ud2.5-dev_2.5-20030618_i386.deb > pgadmin3-libwxgtk2ud2.5_2.5-20030618_i386.deb > Please tell me when your patched tarball will be available so that I > build packages with it. > > They are static (no more shared) libraries and headers needed > to build > pgadmin3. I prefixed package's name with 'pgadmin3' so to be > sure there > won't be a clash with future official debian packages names. These > packages should not be installed unless you want to do some > development > on pgadmin3. > > I now build pgadmin3 linked statically against these versions of > wxWindows (just as Jean-Michel's does with RPMS). > As I think we can't integrate debian for the moment, we don't > need to be > fully compliant with its policy.... > > As soon as some official debian packages will be available > that permit a > good integration of pgadmin3 I will go to some more compliant build. > > As I said in the mail before, any suggestions are welcome. It all sounds good to me. The important thing is that there will be a Debian distro, and as soon as it complies with theirrules it can potentially be made 'official'. > Dave, thank you for the account, don't hesitate to contact me if you > need some information. > > Another thing : > I need to know the "upstream author" to complete the package > form from > debian, who shall I write down ? > you ? pgadmin development team ? and which email ? yours or > pgadmin-hackers ? Officially it's: The pgAdmin development Team pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org Of course, we don't write wxWindows... Regards, Dave.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jm.poure@freesurf.fr] > Sent: 30 June 2003 11:03 > To: Dave Page > Cc: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] wxWindows Build > > > On Monday 30 June 2003 11:23, Dave Page wrote: > > Probably if i new the time/timezone at which it was > created. There may > > also be some bootstraps to run before it's usable and I don't know > > what that is. > > A simple "autoconf" should suffice as explained in the > wxWindows docs. I will > have a try later today, after I finish some ongoing work, in > order to upgrade > the existing RPMs. Don't worry, doing it now.... Regards, Dave