Windows binaries

Lubomir I. Ivanov neolit123 at
Sat Nov 26 07:03:03 PST 2011

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dirk Hohndel" <dirk at>
> Sorry for the late response - this got dropped a couple of trips ago :-/

np and thanks for the reply,
basically in the lost email to the mailing list i was going to propose to 
maintain the win32 packaging,
but i'm sure you can handle all that with the cross build tools. also you can 
upload the win32 installer directly to your site, while i will have to send 
updates on each version increase or link from dropbox or another site...

> I tend to agree with the people who believe that for an open source project 
> that uses unmodified
> libraries as distributed by a distribution and simply compiles them as a
> convenience for the user, it is ok to point to the distribution as a
> place to get the sources from.

seems very reasonable, i think.

> I also believe I've fixed the typecast warnings
> that you provided a patch for a while ago (but of course the patch no
> longer applies with the refactored code - it also dropped the TEXT()
> macro which my reading of the reference docs makes me believe is
> incorrect).

all looks ok in those parts. i only get a couple of mingw-win32 related warnings 
in libdivecomputer.c which can be easily fixed. i can send a patch when i get a 

>> 2) i have a folder over here called c:\dev\linuxlibs\... containing all the
>> needed libraries + a pkg-config setup (.PC files). would it be ok to zip this
>> one as well and provide it for download from the website. would this violate
>> licenses ?
> See above. I don't think so. As I am cross compiling I am taking a
> different approach, though. I assume people install the cross compiled
> MinGW packages from their distribution to build Windows binaries. I'll
> be happy to ALSO distribute the necessary instructions to make it easy
> for people to build natively - as long as your changes don't break cross
> compilation or any of the native builds.

if someone is building opensource software all the time, he might have a nice 
pkg-config setup with .PC files on win32 (for such a user the default Makefile 
_should_ work), but as an alternative i was going to propose a separate 
"Makefile.win32nopkg" that can have the paths hardcoded for users that for 
example only need to build subsurface.

my main reason behind this is that pkg-config does not make much sense on win32, 
unless one is using a package manager like in cygwin (but to my knowledge there 
isn't a default one for msys/mingw), or has all the needed .PC files, which he 
has to edit _manually_ in most cases.

a "" can be provided for download (to be extracted in 
/c/libs/ ) and the user would build with:
make -f Makefile.win32nopkg LIBPATH=/c/libs/

i have an example here:


btw i've downloaded all my libraries from the (gtk+), but it looks like i'm 
using different versions that yours.
if a zip "" is also provided then it has to match the 
versions in "". e.g. i have "libxml2.dll" and 


More information about the subsurface mailing list