Re: Directory cleanup

Le 13/05/2011 20:37, Joost Verburg a écrit : "Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" wrote in message news:4dcd44ce.6090...@lyx.org... I'd have to understand what the actual patch is. I did not find it at first glance in the zip file. The subdirectories in the zip file contain the patches. There are quite a l

Re: Directory cleanup

"Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" wrote in message news:4dcd44ce.6090...@lyx.org... > I'd have to understand what the actual patch is. I did not find it at > first glance in the zip file. The subdirectories in the zip file contain the patches. There are quite a lot of them. Joost

Re: Directory cleanup

Le 13/05/2011 09:44, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : MSVC patches and a CMake build system are available at ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/contrib/windows/src/ I didn't write this code myself. There used to be SourceForge project "cgettext" maintaining this, but for unknown reasons it's entirely gone n

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/12/2011 05:05 PM, Joost Verburg wrote: "Abdelrazak Younes" wrote in message news:4dcb8b0d.6090...@lyx.org... AFAIK Joost maintains such a dll. Joost could you please update the intl directory with whatever fixes you have? AFAIK2 the gettext developpers have dropped msvc support a long tim

Re: Directory cleanup

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 05:53:28AM +0200, Peter Kümmel wrote: > On 11.05.2011 20:19, Pavel Sanda wrote: > >Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > >>Side notes: > >>1: we should really get rid of boost source. > >>2: we should really get rid of boost using code > > > >whats your solution the problems with tr1::

Re: Directory cleanup

"Abdelrazak Younes" wrote in message news:4dcb8b0d.6090...@lyx.org... > AFAIK Joost maintains such a dll. Joost could you please update the intl > directory with whatever fixes you have? > AFAIK2 the gettext developpers have dropped msvc support a long time ago. Yes there's no MSVC support main

Re: Directory cleanup

Le 12/05/2011 16:57, Joost Verburg a écrit : On 05/12/2011 10:15 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Could we in general depend on gnome dependencies instead of ours? AFAIK those binaries are all based on MinGW. We use MSVC. Do you need to change the sources to build with msvc? Could we do the s

Re: Directory cleanup

> On 05/12/2011 10:15 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Could we in general depend on gnome dependencies instead of ours? AFAIK those binaries are all based on MinGW. We use MSVC. Joost

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/12/2011 10:53 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 12/05/11 10:19, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : Gnome does have prebuild versions of gettext here: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/ Could we in general depend on gnome dependencies instead of ours? No, we can't use

Re: Directory cleanup

Le 12/05/11 10:19, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : Gnome does have prebuild versions of gettext here: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/gnome/binaries/win32/dependencies/ Could we in general depend on gnome dependencies instead of ours? No, we can't use them, they are cross compiled from Linux using gcc (e

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/12/2011 10:15 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 12/05/11 09:23, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : On 05/11/2011 10:39 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 11/05/2011 14:08, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : 3: should we get rid of intl source code? Actually I would prefer to be able to compile libt

Re: Directory cleanup

Le 12/05/11 09:23, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : On 05/11/2011 10:39 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 11/05/2011 14:08, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : 3: should we get rid of intl source code? Actually I would prefer to be able to compile libtinl with msvc so we do not have to chase dlls and can

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/12/2011 09:22 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Peter Kümmel > wrote: On 11.05.2011 13:54, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: On 05/10/2011 08:21 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote: On 10.05.2011 19:32, Jean-Marc Lasgoutte

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 10:39 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 11/05/2011 14:08, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : 3: should we get rid of intl source code? Actually I would prefer to be able to compile libtinl with msvc so we do not have to chase dlls and can switch to the most recent gettext version.

Re: Directory cleanup

Peter Kümmel wrote: > On 11.05.2011 20:19, Pavel Sanda wrote: >> Abdelrazak Younes wrote: >>> Side notes: >>> 1: we should really get rid of boost source. >>> 2: we should really get rid of boost using code >> >> whats your solution the problems with tr1::regexp in gcc discussed last >> time? > >

Re: Directory cleanup

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Peter Kümmel wrote: > On 11.05.2011 13:54, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > >> On 05/10/2011 08:21 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote: >> >>> On 10.05.2011 19:32, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>> Le 10/05/11 19:29, Peter Kümmel a écrit : > The idea was not to pollute

Re: Directory cleanup

On 11.05.2011 20:19, Pavel Sanda wrote: Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Side notes: 1: we should really get rid of boost source. 2: we should really get rid of boost using code whats your solution the problems with tr1::regexp in gcc discussed last time? We could switch to QRegEx. But it's not a 10

Re: Directory cleanup

On 11.05.2011 13:54, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: On 05/10/2011 08:21 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote: On 10.05.2011 19:32, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 10/05/11 19:29, Peter Kümmel a écrit : The idea was not to pollute the src dirs because much more than CMakeLists.txt is needed. But I think we could mo

Re: Directory cleanup

Le 11/05/2011 14:08, Abdelrazak Younes a écrit : 3: should we get rid of intl source code? Actually I would prefer to be able to compile libtinl with msvc so we do not have to chase dlls and can switch to the most recent gettext version. JMarc

Re: Directory cleanup

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Side notes: > 1: we should really get rid of boost source. > 2: we should really get rid of boost using code whats your solution the problems with tr1::regexp in gcc discussed last time? pavel

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 03:04 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote: Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Hum even svn is able to track renames... Just try "svn log trunk/CMakeLists.txt" if you don't believe me... i never tried this with svn, it is that "-p" which makes me so happy and actually one of my most popular git commands

Re: Directory cleanup

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: >> Hum even svn is able to track renames... > > Just try "svn log trunk/CMakeLists.txt" if you don't believe me... i never tried this with svn, it is that "-p" which makes me so happy and actually one of my most popular git commands ;) p

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 02:50 PM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: On 05/11/2011 02:41 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote: Abdelrazak Younes wrote: src/lyx/ : basically one C++ file with main() using the other libraries below or not src/boost/ src/intl/ src/core/ : everything that is now in src/. Some of that may go in

Re: Directory cleanup

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Hum even svn is able to track renames... > >> i mean something like git log -p LyX.cpp is gone > > git log --follow LyX.cpp i should reread man pages from time to time :) take my message back, pavel

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 02:41 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote: Abdelrazak Younes wrote: src/lyx/ : basically one C++ file with main() using the other libraries below or not src/boost/ src/intl/ src/core/ : everything that is now in src/. Some of that may go in new src/export/ and src/import/ directories. the

Re: Directory cleanup

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:34:16PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > > So your itches is more important than others? No, your itches are more important to me. -- Enrico

Re: Directory cleanup

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > > src/lyx/ : basically one C++ file with main() using the other libraries > below or not > > src/boost/ > > src/intl/ > > src/core/ : > everything that is now in src/. Some of that may go in new src/export/ > and src/import/ directories. the bad side is that we lose

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 02:24 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:14:10PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: On 05/11/2011 02:08 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 01:54:07PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: This way we would have one directory per program or library.

Re: Directory cleanup

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 02:14:10PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > On 05/11/2011 02:08 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > >On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 01:54:07PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > >> > >>This way we would have one directory per program or library. > >Sorry, but I really don't see the need

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 02:08 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 01:54:07PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: This way we would have one directory per program or library. Sorry, but I really don't see the need for a reorganization that will destabilize things and will cause people to fix

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/11/2011 01:54 PM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: src/boost/ src/intl/ Side notes: 1: we should really get rid of boost source. 2: we should really get rid of boost using code 3: should we get rid of intl source code? Abdel.

Re: Directory cleanup

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 01:54:07PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > On 05/10/2011 08:21 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote: > >On 10.05.2011 19:32, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>Le 10/05/11 19:29, Peter Kümmel a écrit : > >>>The idea was not to pollute the src dirs because much more than > >>>CMakeLists.txt

Re: Directory cleanup

On 05/10/2011 08:21 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote: On 10.05.2011 19:32, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 10/05/11 19:29, Peter Kümmel a écrit : The idea was not to pollute the src dirs because much more than CMakeLists.txt is needed. But I think we could move the CMakeLists.txt into the source dirs and

Re: Directory cleanup

On 10.05.2011 22:53, Pavel Sanda wrote: Peter Kümmel wrote: boost and intl is not our code, but it is source code -> src/3rdparty/boost src/3rdparty/intl src/cygwin i would expect that src/ contains "our" code, but no hard opinion. At least we should not have boost and intl at

Re: Directory cleanup

Peter Kümmel wrote: > sourcedoc is for development documentation-> > doc/sourcedoc > doc/coding why not development/ ? p

Re: Directory cleanup

Peter Kümmel wrote: > boost and intl is not our code, but it is source code -> > src/3rdparty/boost > src/3rdparty/intl > src/cygwin i would expect that src/ contains "our" code, but no hard opinion. > po is ui needed at compile time -> > src/po please no. git has no way how to a