[Pan-devel] Re: Pan 0.14.2.91 for Windows?

[Duncan]

Alan Sanderson posted <address@hidden>, excerpted
below,  on Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:06:24 +1000:

> I'd like to create an installer of 0.14.2.91 for Windows but have never
> done it before. Does anyone know how to do it? I've got Cygwin (bash,
> gcc, etc.) installed and GTK runtime environment 2.2.4.1
> <http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/gtk-win/GTK-Runtime-Environment-2.2.4.1.exe?download>
> for windows installed (do I need to have GTK development environment
> 2.2.4.1 installed?). So what now? How do I compile it on Windows (I have
> some programming experience but not a lot) and then how do I package it
> in a similar way to the Pan team have done with 0.14.2? Does anyone
> know?

Hopefully, you get a bit more help, as I don't do MSWormOS, having found
the line MS crossed with eXPrivacy "one line to far", as they say, so they
pushed me to Linux, which I'd been looking at but may have never actually
switched to given the decade of MSWormOS experience I had by then, had
they not asked me to go where I was not willing to go, privacy and
permission to run stuff on what IS after all my own computer -wise.

Anyway, yes, AFAIK, you /do/ need the development env.  You don't need
cygwin, altho with it you /may/ be able to use a more traditional Unix
based PAN, I'm not sure.  You also need the development versions of gnet,
which PAN uses for its network stuff, and possibly aspell, if you want
spell-checking (don't know if that's available for MSWormOS or not).

Charles /had/ instructions up somewhere, I believe, but don't know if they
still are.  FWIW, the original GTK-win he used is no longer under
development, with the author referring inquiries to another one that still
/is/ being developed.  Some posts have mentioned there are enough
differences it's not /simple/ to switch to the new one, and I'm not sure
whether anyone has gotten it and the newer PAN to work, or not.  It should
be possible, I'd guess, but as you are likely no doubt aware, MSWormOS
users don't tend to have the same abilities to get down and dirty with
their systems that many Linux/BSD/Unix folks do, and from the posts, it
has been impossible for /me/ anyway to judge whether the problems have
been relatively simple ones or ones that would be considered show stoppers
even to your ordinary Linux DIY sysadmin.

Of course, /my/ preference would be that people just quit "wasting their
time" with a "toy" OS that doesn't even ship with its own system compiler
collection, and is about as "free" as Saudi Arabia, and come away from the
dark side, but I recognize there are practicality and timing issues
involved (it took me two years and that final push from MS before I
switched after I decided life would probably be better in the "free"
world), and that it's not my systems and my life that are in question
here, but that of others.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --
Benjamin Franklin