Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] building gnuradio on windows with msvc

[Don Ward]

Josh Blum wrote:

> On 01/02/2011 08:21 AM, Moeller wrote:
> > Hi Josh, isn't it easier with the GNU-Toolchain like Mingw (Windows
> > native) or Cygwin (POSIX/Windows API)? For Cygwin there are lots of
> > prebuilt packages and others build easily with ./configure ; make.
> > Some need to be patched. Once I managed to get gnuradio running in
> > Cygwin (X-windows) with GRC and did some live operations (waterfall,
> > spectrum) with the soundcard. Unfortunately the latest SVN versions
> > have some Boost and other errors and don't compile any more. The
> > USRP2-drivers with raw socket interfaces didn't work, but with UHD
> > and UDP-sockets this might be easier to realize. I don't have much
> > experience with Mingw, but this gives you Windows native executables
> > and is still very GNU-compatible. Usually I prefer Cygwin, but this
> > gives you a lot of trouble when combining executables/DLLs from the
> > Cygwin and native world (the exception handlers and runtime libs are
> > not compatible).
>
> Well, lets assume you have to compile gnuradio stuff on windows. Its
> going to be painful. The question is, were should it hurt?
>
> If you put the burden on the code to be general enough to compile under
> a non-gnu compiler (MSVC here), then the end-developer will have an
> easier time, especially with the dependencies. Building the gnuradio
> dependencies from source, many needing patches, when your are already
> trying to build gnuradio... well its a world of pain to say the least.
>
> So, the burden on the code, means a burden on some developers to port
> components and periodically pull in the latest branch and test it,
> backport fixes. Thats why I ask, is anyone interested? Is it valuable
> lower the entry bar to gnuradio on windows? Because if not, the burden
> then falls back to the end-developer to setup a mingw/cygwin and build
> all the dependencies. I guess thats the way it is.
>
> mingw: I don't have much experience with mingw. From the wiki, it looks
> like you have to build all the deps from source. I tried once to get an
> environment setup and gave up in failure. Maybe its much better now. Can
> anyone with mingw experience weigh in?

I use MinGW for my "production" GNU Radio system.  It is a pain to gather 
and build the dependencies, but it's not as hard as it looks, and once it 
works it works forever.   And if anyone is interested, I have a script to do 
all the work (posted twice, so far, in attachments to this list).

> Cygwin: I like thats its easy to install to get the useful command line
> tools, but building gnuradio + dependencies on it is just crazy hard.
> And its this pseudo-emulated environment. I don't know what that does
> for performance, but the gui apps don't look pretty. I did get grc
> working on it years back, then after some code overhaul, the python and
> gtk related packages were out of date for years. Can't mix dlls, cant
> use the pre-built gtk installer; no grc 4u :-)

Cygwin is easier to get going, but Cygwin itself and the required 
dependencies make for a moving target with a continuously changing set of 
patches required to various packages.  Speed doesn't seem to be an issue, 
apart from much slower builds (probably higher overhead to create a 
process).

I haven't tried building qtgui, grc, usrp2, or uhd on either system, so I 
don't know what the issues are with these.

I have never used MSVC, but given the choices I think it is worth pursuing. 
And I like the idea of being able to use the same build system on all 
platforms, though I can't comment on the practical aspects.

Thanks, Josh, for doing this.  Even if your changes are never incorporated 
in the main repository, I hope they can be stashed with your notes somewhere 
where the next person with the time and motivation to work on this can find 
them.

-- Don W.