[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Windows and GnuStep
Re: Windows and GnuStep
Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:03:42 -0500
Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)
Andrew Ruder wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:48:26AM -0500, Andy Satori wrote:
I've got a few questions and I hope they don't come across wrong. I
want to clarify something before I begin. Yes, I'm frustrated.
Understandable; software can be frustrating at times.
[...] Applications which use Foundation (AKA GNUstep-Base) exclusively
are portable to nearly any posix compliant OS, as well as Windows
(using Cygwin or MingW). [...]
Ok, so it says GNUstep-base is portable to windows. I'm not sure how
that applies to -gui (which the rest of this email is about).
But isn't that entire page in refutation of a Cocoa development book,
and isn't the vast majority, say 99% of Cocoa development about the GUI?
I'm sorry, but I failed to make the intuitive leap there, shame on me
And yet, here I am after a month of casually futzing around with various
revisions of the Windows installer, and the end results of those
installers and I have exactly one Application from the GnuStep
Applications page built. Of course, it wouldn't run without manually
building a missing dependancy, and then manually starting a program that
apparently all GnuStep GUI applications require before running (gdomap
Cool, you found some bugs? Did you put them on bugs.gnustep.org? As
far as I can tell you did not. Heck, the only other email I ever see
from you is from November complaining about this same thing. Correct me
if I'm wrong...
I'm going to ask a silly question, where pray tell would I have looked
to find a reference to bugs.gnustep.org (which until I saw this email I
didn't know existed, I assumed that you had something somewhere, but
hadn't gone digging for). It's not linked or referenced in any way on
the main gnustep.org website, having now been made aware of it's
presence and gone looking, it's under "Develper's", which, in the realm
of GnuStep, I, nor the casual user looking to install GnuStep to support
an application they wish to run (GnuMail.app in my case) are not
Developers, and it's not likely in the top 5 places we are going to
look, Think Home Page, Applications, Download, Screenshots, maybe the
Wiki if we are feeling particular adventurous.
For the record, that one app is Gorm, which candidly is only of use to
build user interfaces, and is an excellent project. ProjectBuilder,
ProjectCenter, GnuMail, AddressBook all however failed, all for
Gorm is a pretty awesome app :). While -gui works on Windows, any
application which ventures outside of the OpenStep/GNUstep API would
automatically lose any portability unless the developer of said
application took care to keep portability in mind. Once again, I'm not
sure how this is in any way about -gui.
After another person took a quick look at things, and got me pointed in
the right direction, I spent last night trying to get a couple of these
built, taking off my 'User' hat and putting on my 'Geek' hat, I don't
generally take my Windows laptop home at night, preferring to work on
the platform I prefer, OS X, writing OSS software there.
After several hours of tweaking, configuring and further hacking...
Project Center won't build because it makes poor assumptions about
symlinks and filesystem abilities in it's build process. GnuMail can't
build because AddressBook can't build, because it's apparently never
been built on Windows to resolve linking order issues and needs some
platform specific ifdef's to get around type declaration issue with
u_int and uint, even built, it doesn't in fact work. I duplicated the
results of another user, where I get menu's but no windows.
Since you seem to have a clue about some of these issues, I decided to
give your own efforts, TalkSoup a quick run. I've used it on Linux, and
found it to be an excellent IRC tool. So, I downloaded NetClasses.
Guess what, it doesn't use -gui, never got to the GUI part. It doesn't
build either (results pasted at the end of this message), no I didn't
try to debug it the build yet.
It does help explain my point. No user that is used to the
./configure;make;make install; world of most OSS apps, even on Windows
is going to get far. As a rule, one app that doesn't work, ok. But
when one out of many succeeds, while the rest consistantly fail? You
aren't going to retain many casual users.
What? You listen to people on IRC? ;) Just kidding...
Not to be offensive, but I find that IRC is a much easier method of
communication. Email tends to come across entirely too abrupt or direct
and frequently generates more anger than results. I don't really like
using email for anything that could be construed as negative or taken
wrong for that very reason, that's why you generally only see me use
this email when I hit my limits, I will pursue other avenues if they are
available. For example, this very conversation has apparently come
across as an attack upon GnuSTep and OSS, when in fact, I'm seriously
trying to understand assertion that GnuStep is anything more than a
partially implemented version of the OpenStep spec that more or less
works on Linux and Unix like systems. MY point was that despite what
has been represented to myself and others in other venues, Windows is
_not_ an equal peer at this time, and it should not be represented as
such on the gnustep.org website, nor by it's proponents.
"There are tested and released tar/gz packages of all GNUstep source at
ftp://ftp.gnustep.org/pub. It is also important to point out here that
getting source from CVS is not advisable for the average user. Quite
often there are issues with CVS versions of projects (in general, not
just with GNUstep) since they are in development. There might be some
experimental code or some code which might not work at all, again this
is true with all projects, not just GNUstep. In general it is
recommended that end users make use of the packages provided on the ftp
site, which are considered to be official releases. These are generally
better tested and more stable than what might be in CVS at any given
point in time."
Do you really think the official stance could possibly be to use CVS?
In general, it is nearly impossible to suggest CVS as an advisable
option because at any given time the CVS could be horribly broken. If
people on IRC suggested CVS (which I'm sure they did) it was probably
only due to the fact that they were using CVS and could assert that it
was in a buildable/usable condition at that *particular* time.
I would agree, however, this doesn't change the core issue. If neither
the 'snapshot' nor the 'CVS' trunks contain stable, usable code, then
it's hard to expect users to be able to draw conclusions different from
the one that is being so eloquently refuted.
So which advice should a user or potential user follow? I shall not
point out that Item 7 on that same page then goes on to explain that
older versions from CVS were the issue. When the current "stable"
version don't build, and the CVS tree is the only potentially viable
option, and when those build, but don't actually work, what conclusions
do you really expect?.
bugs.gnustep.org bugs.gnustep.org bugs.gnustep.org? If you had build
problems on the stable release, there would undoubtedly have been
someone that could have helped you.
Unfortunately, as I mentioned above. At that point, I wasn't in
'Developer' land, I was just a user, installing a binary base and then
trying to install a couple of applications. At at the time I was
testing the viability of existing applications.
Now, all of this said, I will grant that things are better, under
Linux. I did get more things built on the Suse 9 box, though, that
was Ok gentlemen, without icons in most applications, and having to
make some other manual modifications to the system to get GnuStep apps
to properly register themselves.
I have used GNUstep on several distros without these problems. But once
again, bugs.gnustep.org, only a quick surf away...
If you know about it. It wasn't mentioned in the brochure.
In short, I simply do not see how GnuStep, in it's current state, is
usable for anyone but the most hard core, die hard users.
As pointed out above, GNUstep *is* used in commercial applications
Windows users are deemed to be clueless gits that aren't worth the time
Wrong. Here's why open source developers don't support windows: no
open source developers use it. Now, that is a rather broad statement,
but I'm pretty sure that most of the Windows work on GNUstep is done by
people who would otherwise be using a unix-like environment. So until
these supposed "windows developers" start showing up and submitting bugs
and fixing things, things will continue plodding along at there
continuous but somewhat slow pace towards things working.
In case you didn't catch the inferencs above. If it wasn't for work
related issues, _I_ wouldn't be using Windows either. I'm a Mac user by
preference, and Linux by preference over Windows, I'd even go back to
OS/2 by preference over Windows. Unfortunately those aren't options,
and thus I looked to GnuStep to bring some comfort level, particularly
as I have been led to believe by GnuStep supporters to believe that it
was viable (particularly a couple that really want Geoff and I to port
our Cocoa# / ObjectiveC to Mono bridge to GnuStep, which was the
secondary reason for this adventure).
Why should *we* convince *your company* that GNUstep isn't a dead end.
Believe it or not, nobody (as far as I know) is making money directly
off of working on GNUstep (some are indirectly, I know). Believe it or
not, people have to put all this code together; it doesn't just pop out
of thin air. We all have jobs, we all have other things to do, we all
have other interests, and while I do not directly contribute to GNUstep
most of the time, I understand all of this. If something is broke,
submit a bug, fix it yourself, or continue waiting for it to be fixed,
but ranting and complaining isn't going to get you anywhere.
This wasn't intended as a rant, nor a complaint, it was always intended
as questions to get opinions about what the communities thoughts on the
status of the Windows implementation where, and to confirm that my
experiences with GnuStep are more or less the norm, or if I'm doing
something blatantly wrong. I apologize if it came across wrong, that was
never the desire.
I swear, half the world thinks that open source software grows on a tree
somewhere in East Africa.
Now before you go there, let me give you my background:
I've been programming professionally for 15 years.
I've been maintaining a MUD based upon OSS drivers for 10 of those
years, I've ported it to 3 hardware platforms and 4 operating systems
(OS/2, BeOS, Windows and now Mac OS X).
I've been maintaining a Windows port of TinyFugue since 1995.
I'm the sole contributor the the PostgreSQL for Mac project.
I'm 1/3 of the group that got Mono for the Mac off the ground (as much
of that work was arguing with Lupus and Miguel to get things fixed as it
was in code contributions)
I'm one of the people working to make Cocoa# and the C# to ObjectiveC
Needless to say I know all about where OSS comes from, It comes from
scratching an itch. I also know that unsuccessful OSS projects have no
guidance or plan. Successful one's do. Sometimes, it takes someone
saying things that others don't want to hear. Think about where X would
be if Havoc Pennington didn't say the things he did.
In short, the whole issue is that right now, the website is portraying
that the status of GnuStep is one thing. Even your own opinion is one
that raises questions, being as NetClasses doesn't appear to use -gui in
any way, and yet it suffers the same problems as the other failed builds.
The question is, how should that be fixed? should the website be
adjusted? should there be a concentrated effort to fix the Windows
port? ( I can set up a Windows box that could be used a test mule for
the GS devs ). These are not accusations, they are questions. I am an
OSS dev and user, I have too many projects on my plate as it is, I
cannot personally extend myself into yet another OSS project much beyond
contributing a box.
Perhaps you understand a little better now, perhaps not. Either way, I
Just as frustrated,
NetClasses-1.05 make output:
Making all in Source...
make: Entering directory `/home/arsatori/netclasses-1.05/Source'
Making build-headers for framework netclasses...
Making all for framework netclasses...
Compiling file NetBase.m ...
NetBase.m: In function `-[NetApplication
NetBase.m:320: error: `ET_RDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m:320: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
NetBase.m:320: error: for each function it appears in.)
NetBase.m:330: error: `ET_WDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m:338: error: `ET_EDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m: In function `-[NetApplication connectObject:]':
NetBase.m:390: error: `ET_EDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m:393: error: `ET_RDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m: In function `-[NetApplication disconnectObject:]':
NetBase.m:416: error: `ET_WDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m:423: error: `ET_RDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m:426: error: `ET_EDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
NetBase.m: In function `-[NetApplication transportNeedsToWrite:]':
NetBase.m:462: error: `ET_WDESC' undeclared (first use in this function)
make: *** [shared_obj/NetBase.o] Error 1
make: *** [netclasses.all.framework.variables] Error 2
make: Leaving directory `/home/arsatori/netclasses-1.05/Source'
make: *** [internal-all] Error 2
Re: Windows and GnuStep,
Andy Satori <=
Message not available
Re: Windows and GnuStep, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2006/02/01
Re: Windows and GnuStep, Robert Slover, 2006/02/02
Re: Windows and GnuStep, Riccardo, 2006/02/05
Message not available
Re: Windows and GnuStep, Christopher Armstrong, 2006/02/05