[e-lang] E 0.9.3 release?
erights at gmail.com
Mon Jan 3 20:15:26 PST 2011
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Mark Miller <erights at gmail.com> wrote:
> Commit notice on subversion r793, available at <
> Candidate 0.9.3b release
> Per advice at
> removed the suppression of "-Werror" and the bogus "(int)" cast. Instead,
> changed virtually all "char" declarations to "unsigned char". It compiles
> fine now with no warnings.
> * E does not auto-install on Windows 7 (and probably never did, and
> perhaps not on Vista either),
> * no one is actually using this Windows-specific installation feature
> (setting up the registry, etc),
> I am deleting the src/csrc/utils, src/csrc/win32, and src/csrc/win32/setup
> directories and changing the code (src/esrc/scripts/setup.e-awt) and
> documentation (src/csrc/setup/README.txt) that depends on them to no longer
> do so. Also changing the Makefiles so that making no longer traverses into
> the deleted directories.
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Thomas Leonard <talex5 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2 January 2011 06:12, Mark Miller <erights at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Thomas,
>> > In order to warm up the old release muscles, I tried building a new
>> > candidate on Windows <http://www.erights.org/download/0-9-3/>. (E does
>> > cross build. The binary for each platform must be built on that
>> > Windows Vista or 7 problems (i.e., since Windows XP):
>> > I can build E fine on Windows 7. However, when I try to install it on
>> > Windows 7, I get a bunch of (quite sensible) permissions violation
>> > when I try to manipulate the registry. No annoying Windows 7 "do you
>> > mean it?" monologue boxes, just errors. However, when I install this
>> > binary on Windows XP, it works as well as it always did.
>> > If anyone knows of a simple fix to get old cygwin/gcc C code for
>> > manipulating the XP registry to work again on Windows 7, please let me
>> > Assuming this doesn't work out easily, I'm inclined to pull all the
>> > magic from the E installation. Would this inconvenience anyone? Does
>> > still care about, for example, the binding of the ".e" extension to the
>> > launching behavior?
>> That's no problem for us. I hadn't even realised there was a Windows
> Prior to today's commit, it was documented in the README.txt file.
> Basically, it said to do an automatic install on Windows either by double
> clicking e.jar or by running "java -jar e.jar" on a command line.
>> I've seen Windows devs at work install E, and as I recall
>> the steps they use are:
>> 1. unpack the E release zip archive somewhere
>> 2. set the E_HOME system variable to that location
>> 3. replace swt.jar with a different one (64-bit issue?)
> I'm running E fine on a 64-bit Windows 7 system without replacing the
> swt.jar file. Can you say more about this issue?
>> Programs are always run using a .bat file launcher because there are
>> always arguments to pass (to set the Java memory limits and add extra
>> jars to classpath).
> Hmmm. I've generally been using the "rune" bash script, as supported by
> Cygwin, rather than the rune.bat script. Perhaps the rune.bat script is
> stale? It should correspond closely to the "rune" bash script.
I should have looked before speculating on that last part. No, rune,bat is
much simpler than rune and has much less functionality.
>> Dr Thomas Leonard http://0install.net/
>> GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6 8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1
>> GPG: DA98 25AE CAD0 8975 7CDA BD8E 0713 3F96 CA74 D8BA
>> e-lang mailing list
>> e-lang at mail.eros-os.org
> Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain
Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the e-lang