7:30 a.m.
Fedora 11 is nearly in beta, and thanks to some judicious cuts at the
end, we made it to 100% feature complete. Thanks to the many people
who helped out reviewing packages and testing.
What do we want to aim for in Fedora 12?
Some ideas - please add your own to this thread.
(1) Win64 support
(see: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-mingw/2009-February/threa...
)
(2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
(3) Darwin / OS X support
(see: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-March/msg00397.html )
(4) Get some of the issues resolved in the packaging guidelines:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW/Packaging_issues
(5) Expand active members, particularly packagers. I would like to
start by having a website which doesn't suck like our current one.
(6) Move educational materials to a single place.
(7) Have a FAQ.
(8) I'd like to have a reasonable Python story. I spent a lot of time
trying to get Python and Python libs to cross-compile, without any
success.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/
Fedora now supports 68 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora
8:41 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 02:25:35PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
They're still missing some stuff though, e.g. the DDK headers.
Does anything support DDK (eg. current MinGW 32 bit)?
I don't really know much about this, but I do know that many people
have asked if we can compile device drivers. This would be very
useful for virt, for example (to compile virtio drivers for Windows).
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any
software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/
8:47 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 02:25:35PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
> > mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
>
> They're still missing some stuff though, e.g. the DDK headers.
Does anything support DDK (eg. current MinGW 32 bit)?
I don't really know much about this, but I do know that many people
have asked if we can compile device drivers. This would be very
useful for virt, for example (to compile virtio drivers for Windows).
Rich.
We aren't missing directx-x stuff. They just aren't in the trunk,
they're in the experimental area. The reason for this is that they
were copied from Wine. If you want directx, you can either get the
DDK and use it directly, or use what's from Wine, or use what we
copied from Wine.
8:50 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:47:04AM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones
<rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 02:25:35PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> > (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
>> > mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
>>
>> They're still missing some stuff though, e.g. the DDK headers.
>
> Does anything support DDK (eg. current MinGW 32 bit)?
>
> I don't really know much about this, but I do know that many people
> have asked if we can compile device drivers. This would be very
> useful for virt, for example (to compile virtio drivers for Windows).
>
> Rich.
We aren't missing directx-x stuff. They just aren't in the trunk,
they're in the experimental area. The reason for this is that they
were copied from Wine. If you want directx, you can either get the
DDK and use it directly, or use what's from Wine, or use what we
copied from Wine.
Can you explain what the different TLAs mean? DDK, etc?
As I say I don't know much about this stuff.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/
Fedora now supports 68 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora
8:52 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:47:04AM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 02:25:35PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >> > (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
> >> > mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
> >>
> >> They're still missing some stuff though, e.g. the DDK headers.
> >
> > Does anything support DDK (eg. current MinGW 32 bit)?
> >
> > I don't really know much about this, but I do know that many people
> > have asked if we can compile device drivers. This would be very
> > useful for virt, for example (to compile virtio drivers for Windows).
> >
> > Rich.
>
> We aren't missing directx-x stuff. They just aren't in the trunk,
> they're in the experimental area. The reason for this is that they
> were copied from Wine. If you want directx, you can either get the
> DDK and use it directly, or use what's from Wine, or use what we
> copied from Wine.
Can you explain what the different TLAs mean? DDK, etc?
As I say I don't know much about this stuff.
Well actually, Kai just pointed out to me that I misread the original
email. I thought he was talking about the directx SDK, not the Driver
Development Kit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Driver_Kit).
Too many acronyms, too little sleep :)
8:51 a.m.
NightStrike wrote:
We aren't missing directx-x stuff. They just aren't in the
trunk,
they're in the experimental area. The reason for this is that they
were copied from Wine. If you want directx, you can either get the
DDK and use it directly, or use what's from Wine, or use what we
copied from Wine.
DDK is the Device Development Kit, it has nothing to do with DirectX.
Kevin Kofler
8:54 a.m.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Does anything support DDK (eg. current MinGW 32 bit)?
I don't really know much about this, but I do know that many people
have asked if we can compile device drivers. This would be very
useful for virt, for example (to compile virtio drivers for Windows).
32-bit MinGW has some support for device driver development contributed by
the ReactOS folks. At least some simple drivers can compile with it. I'm
not sure how complete it is though. And unfortunately there's no 64-bit
support, which is definitely needed for device drivers because you can't
run a 32-bit device driver on a 64-bit OS. (That said, with 64-bit drivers
there's also the problem that 64-bit Vista requires signed drivers unless
you manually choose a boot option every single time you boot - every
available method to automate this has been removed.)
Kevin Kofler
9 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 02:54:34PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
(That said, with 64-bit drivers
there's also the problem that 64-bit Vista requires signed drivers unless
you manually choose a boot option every single time you boot - every
available method to automate this has been removed.)
Nice ... and will whoever signs drivers sign ones developed
using free software?
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-df lists disk usage of guests without needing to install any
software inside the virtual machine. Supports Linux and Windows.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-df/
9:03 a.m.
2009/3/13 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com>:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 02:54:34PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> (That said, with 64-bit drivers
> there's also the problem that 64-bit Vista requires signed drivers unless
> you manually choose a boot option every single time you boot - every
> available method to automate this has been removed.)
Nice ... and will whoever signs drivers sign ones developed
using free software?
Rich.
For signing (as for 32-bit and 64-bit) you sadly need the ms tools to
do so. But of course it should work.
Kai
--
| (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste
| (='.'=) Bunny into your signature to help
| (")_(") him gain world domination
10 a.m.
Kai Tietz wrote:
For signing (as for 32-bit and 64-bit) you sadly need the ms tools
to
do so. But of course it should work.
The problem is that if you sign things yourself with a test key, it won't be
much more helpful for distributing it than not signing it at all. The
drivers need to be signed by M$ for users to be able to install them
without convoluted workarounds (and without losing HD video support, too).
Kevin Kofler
9 a.m.
2009/3/13 Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at>:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Does anything support DDK (eg. current MinGW 32 bit)?
>
> I don't really know much about this, but I do know that many people
> have asked if we can compile device drivers. This would be very
> useful for virt, for example (to compile virtio drivers for Windows).
32-bit MinGW has some support for device driver development contributed by
the ReactOS folks. At least some simple drivers can compile with it. I'm
not sure how complete it is though. And unfortunately there's no 64-bit
support, which is definitely needed for device drivers because you can't
run a 32-bit device driver on a 64-bit OS. (That said, with 64-bit drivers
there's also the problem that 64-bit Vista requires signed drivers unless
you manually choose a boot option every single time you boot - every
available method to automate this has been removed.)
We are staying in contact to ReactOS. They offered us to use their
ported DDK package (yes, it has 64-bit capabilities). Things are
getting stucked, because they try to find some authors of some files
in the package, to re-license it to PD. Otherwise we can't put them
into our base header-set, because we won't use GPLed code here.
Cheers,
Kai
--
| (\_/) This is Bunny. Copy and paste
| (='.'=) Bunny into your signature to help
| (")_(") him gain world domination
9:11 a.m.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Fedora 11 is nearly in beta, and thanks to some judicious cuts at
the
end, we made it to 100% feature complete. Thanks to the many people
who helped out reviewing packages and testing.
What do we want to aim for in Fedora 12?
Some ideas - please add your own to this thread.
(1) Win64 support
(see: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-mingw/2009-February/threa...
)
yes.
(2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and the
changes can be done in the background.
(3) Darwin / OS X support
(see: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-March/msg00397.html )
yes (if won't have license problems)
(4) Get some of the issues resolved in the packaging guidelines:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW/Packaging_issues
imho we can write packaging guide for CC as an f12 feature and we can
start a discussion about it.
(9) gstreamer support. we already working on it, but it's not too easy:-(
--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
9:13 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Farkas Levente <lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org> wrote:
> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and the
changes can be done in the background.
We're ready now :)
9:30 a.m.
NightStrike wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Farkas Levente
<lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org> wrote:
>> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
>> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
> we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and the
> changes can be done in the background.
We're ready now :)
ok:-) then wouldn't it be useful for everybody to megre mingw32 with
mingw64. or at least start the process...
--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
9:33 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:30:21PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
NightStrike wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Farkas Levente <lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org> wrote:
>>> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
>>> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
>> we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and the
>> changes can be done in the background.
>
> We're ready now :)
ok:-) then wouldn't it be useful for everybody to megre mingw32 with
mingw64. or at least start the process...
I talked to NightStrike about this already, and said basically nothing
will get done until Fedora 11 is released. This thread is for
planning what happens *after* that.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/
Fedora now supports 68 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora
11:36 a.m.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:30:21PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
> NightStrike wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Farkas Levente <lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org>
wrote:
>>>> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
>>>> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
>>> we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and the
>>> changes can be done in the background.
>> We're ready now :)
> ok:-) then wouldn't it be useful for everybody to megre mingw32 with
> mingw64. or at least start the process...
I talked to NightStrike about this already, and said basically nothing
will get done until Fedora 11 is released. This thread is for
planning what happens *after* that.
i mean above that the upstream mingw32 and mingw64 merge.
--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
10:32 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Farkas Levente <lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org> wrote:
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:30:21PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
>> NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Farkas Levente <lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org>
wrote:
>>>>> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime, since
>>>>> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
>>>> we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and the
>>>> changes can be done in the background.
>>> We're ready now :)
>> ok:-) then wouldn't it be useful for everybody to megre mingw32 with
>> mingw64. or at least start the process...
>
> I talked to NightStrike about this already, and said basically nothing
> will get done until Fedora 11 is released. This thread is for
> planning what happens *after* that.
i mean above that the upstream mingw32 and mingw64 merge.
Any chance of improving support for mingw-w64?
2:35 a.m.
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:32:20AM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Farkas Levente
<lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org> wrote:
> Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:30:21PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
>>> NightStrike wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Farkas Levente
<lfarkas(a)lfarkas.org> wrote:
>>>>>> (2)? Use mingw-w64 project to build 32 bit w32api/runtime,
since
>>>>>> mingw-w64 seems to be more active.
>>>>> we can still use mingw32 until mingw-64 will be ready to switch and
the
>>>>> changes can be done in the background.
>>>> We're ready now :)
>>> ok:-) then wouldn't it be useful for everybody to megre mingw32 with
>>> mingw64. or at least start the process...
>>
>> I talked to NightStrike about this already, and said basically nothing
>> will get done until Fedora 11 is released. This thread is for
>> planning what happens *after* that.
>
> i mean above that the upstream mingw32 and mingw64 merge.
Any chance of improving support for mingw-w64?
I'm afraid we're still waiting for someone to audit those
header files.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
Fedora now supports 80 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora
9:15 a.m.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:11:24PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
(9) gstreamer support. we already working on it, but it's not too
easy:-(
Have you got any candidate packages for this? What does it involve?
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my OCaml programming blog: http://camltastic.blogspot.com/
Fedora now supports 68 OCaml packages (the OPEN alternative to F#)
http://cocan.org/getting_started_with_ocaml_on_red_hat_and_fedora
9:28 a.m.
Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:11:24PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
> (9) gstreamer support. we already working on it, but it's not too easy:-(
Have you got any candidate packages for this? What does it involve?
we've got a few but as i don't have time to look into them i'd not like
to share them. first i'd like to review they are very experimental.
unfortunately gstreamer has a lots of dependencies:-( and most of he has
problems to compile on windows...
--
Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!"
5148
days inactive
5520
days old
20 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Farkas Levente -
Kai Tietz -
Kevin Kofler -
NightStrike -
Richard W.M. Jones