Hi all, In GStreamer we have been using, for a couple a years now, a build system named cerbero to build and package the GStreamer SDK for Linux, Windows, OS X, Android and iOS (http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/download/) and we are also using it for continuous integration with Jenkins (https://jenkins.arracacha.collabora.co.uk/). I have been working in some recipes and packages repository for the Gtk+3 build that can build and package Gtk+3 for Windows and OS X providing native packages for those platforms that developers can use for developing or to bundle them in their applications. https://github.com/ylatuya/gtk-cerbero I think cerbero could greatly help Gtk+'s developers in the same way it's being helping GStreamer: * A single build system for the all the platforms * Support for cross-compilation from linux to windows * Build from tarballs or git * Easy integration with CI systems * Could build Gtk with MSVC too with some changes in the VS project files, even for CI (using autotools for the generated files and building with msbuild) * Native packages for all the platforms split in runtime and development. * Windows: MSI based packages * Windows: Merge modules to bundle gtk with windows installers. * Windows: Integration with Visual Studio with import libraries and pkg-config-style property sheets (this means importing a single property sheet file to have all the search paths and libraries variables set for you) * OS X: real Framework that can be drag and dropped to XCode * OS X: pkg files that can be easily bundled in applications. What it can't do (yet): * Cross-compile the msi packages from linux to windows (might be possible using the msitools, but we have never tried it yet) * Build the full stack with msvc. * Cross-compile gobject-introspection (it's been a while since I didn't check) Here are some examples of what you can do: Cross-compile gtk for windows x86: ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win32.cbc bootstrap ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win32.cbc build gtk+3 Build gtk from git: ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win32.cbc build gtk+3-git Hack for Windows in Linux: ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win32.cbc shell git clone gtk; configure && make CI: ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win32.cbc fetch-package gtk-3 --reset-deps --full-reset ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win32.cbc build gtk+3-git Create the SDK package for OS X: ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk.cbc bootstrap ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk.cbc package gtk-3-sdk Create the SDK package for Windows x86_64: ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win64.cbc bootstrap ./cerbero/cerbero-uninstalled -c gtk-win64.cbc package gtk-3-sdk Cheers, Andoni 2015-06-12 13:42 GMT+02:00 Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi@xxxxxxxxx>: > Hi; > > On 12 June 2015 at 12:27, anatoly techtonik <techtonik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Currently, we advertise ad hoc Windows builds on gtk.org; those are >>> out of date, and lack many of the bug fixes that went into GTK. >> >> I see two problems here: >> - [ ] http://www.gtk.org/download/win32.php - doesn't say this info >> - [ ] http://www.gtk.org/download/win32.php - doesn't have a link to >> the site source to fix that > > Yes, that's why I said: > > | The current stance of everyone involved in the Windows backend for > | GLib and GTK+ is to stop advertising binary builds for Windows > > There's also a bug about this: > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=747742 > > It would be good to fix the website to reflect the reality. > >> Points that are also missing to enable me (or anybody else) to >> fix the situation: >> 1. Is it possible to make "lack many of the bug fixes that went into GTK" >> a link to actual list? > > The "actual list" is published with each release of GTK+. > >> 2. How to detect automatically that builds listed on the page are out >> of date? > > There are no new builds. The last build for Windows was for GTK+ 3.6, > which, as of today, is two and half years old. > > The website needs to be changed to reflect the reality of the project, > not the past. > >>> This >>> situation is confusing for application developers, and makes the >>> project look bad. It also reflect badly on the great work that >>> developers have been doing in order to make GTK work well on Windows. >> >> Editing the site with heads up on the situation and an entrypoint >> to change it would make it better. > > Indeed it would. > >>> On top of that, we don't offer binary builds for any other platform, >>> and instead rely on distributors — like Homebrew on Mac; the *BSD >>> ports; or the various Linux distributions — to provide binary builds >>> for them. Windows is an anomaly, mostly because there weren't >>> good/usable software distributions in the past. This has now changed, >>> and it's a good thing to ensure that developers on Windows get >>> reliable, up to date software. >> >> You're speaking about Chocolatey or about Steam? =) > > I'm talking about MSYS2. > >>> MSYS2 is for developers, not for end users. >> >> Ok. Still I don't get it. I wanted a local directory install for GTK libs for >> compiling Wesnoth. I don't want system global install of MSYS2 - I >> already have MinGW unpacked locally and building with SCons. Is that >> possible? > > That's possible if you build GTK+ for yourself. > > There have been no binary builds of GTK+ since January 2013, but there > have been five new development cycles, so if you want to use an up to > date version of GTK+, your current choices for building your > application on Windows are either to build GTK yourself, alongside its > dependencies, or use MSYS2 and its packages. > >>> Telling your users to download your application; download DLLs from >>> gtk.org; shove them into some directory; and, finally, hope for the >>> best, was never a good software distribution mechanism. >> >> What about developers? I find it much better workflow when DLLs are >> local to the project being built rather then installed globally, because >> often you need to test several lib versions for testing different bugs and >> branches. > > That's what I said above. > >>>> Can GTK be cross-compiled for Windows? >>> >>> Yes, it can, and it routinely is. >> >> Is there a single command to run to do this? > > There isn't. On Fedora you can use the mingw(32|64) toolchain packages > to build your own packages. > >>>>> What the GTK team would love, on the other hand, is somebody putting >>>>> the effort in setting up and maintaining a continuous integration >>>>> service — similar to https://build.gnome.org — for Windows builds. >>>>> This way we would be able to catch build regressions after every >>>>> commit, without relying on the application developers to file bugs. >>>> >>>> http://www.appveyor.com/ if using closed source service is okay. >>> >>> No, it's really not — especially if it has to run on the gnome.org >>> infrastructure. >> >> But it should be compiled using MinGW, not Visual Studio, right? >> Because appveyor is the only known CI service (to me) that compiles >> the stuff with VS. > > Visual Studio is another beast entirely. > > The GNOME Foundation kindly provided us with a VM that we can use to > do Windows builds — which is what Tarnyko was using — using > cross-compilation. > > Ciao, > Emmanuele. > > -- > https://www.bassi.io > [@] ebassi [@gmail.com] > _______________________________________________ > gtk-devel-list mailing list > gtk-devel-list@xxxxxxxxx > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list -- Andoni Morales Alastruey LongoMatch:The Digital Coach http://www.longomatch.ylatuya.es _______________________________________________ gtk-list mailing list gtk-list@xxxxxxxxx https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-list
