Mark Phippard wrote:
>changed their packaging and do not provide a static version for download
>on the newer versions. Actually, I see thay have some docs on the
>changes:
>
>http://www.gzip.org/zlib/DLL_FAQ.txt
>
>
You can do what I did -- take the zlib sources and build your own static
library. The makefile even lets you rename the library on the command line.
>>And where did you get that intl.dll?
>>
>>
>
>I went to the location specified in the INSTALL document.
>
>http://mirrors.kernel.org/gnu/gettext/
>
>
>>Use the libintl from the downloads area on subversion.tigris.org.
>>
>>
>
>Thank you, I did not know it was there. At some point it would be nice to
>clarify in the INSTALL document how that version of the file ought to be
>used in conjunction with the ones it points you to download.
>
>
We'll obviouisly have to put in some work to get the message translation
support on Windows out of the experimental stage, where it is now.
>>>PS - Personally, I see little benefit from using DLL's on Windows. I
>>>think it is only going to lead to problems and Subversion would be
>>>
>>>
>better
>
>
>>>off if it stuck with statically linking as much as it can.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Indeed? Why is that? Or rather, why would shared libs be useful
>>elsewhere, but not on Windows?
>>
>>
>Because Windows does not have a central package management system for
>installing and managing shared libraries.
>
It does, in fact...
>Therefore, one of the reasons
>for using them (space savings) does not happen. Also, another reason
>would be that in the case of something like the Neon problem (which I
>realize is still statically linked) you could have updated to the fixed
>version of the library and all of your applications would get the fix.
>Again, Windows users do not do this and have no way of knowing to update
>shared libraries, except those provided by Microsoft.
>
>What are the benefits that you see Subversion gaining by using shared
>DLL's? I do not like, for example, the way the new system requires DLL's
>to be copied to Apache's bin folder so that the modules can run. That
>doesn't seem like a kosher way to do things. Perhaps when there is a
>formal installer out for 1.1 that is not how it will be done, but that is
>how the INSTALL document currently does it.
>
>
What I'm hoping for is that all Subversion clients start using the same
DLLs. Once that happens, you could theoretically fix a "bug" in, say
TortoiseSVN, by upgrading the core Subversion package (libraries +
command-line client, or just the libraries). If we get the packaging
right -- and get other projects to cooperate -- it would make using
Subversion much easier, IMHO.
--
Brane Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jun 14 20:17:25 2004