RE: [Freeciv] Gtk+ on win32 (was Native Win32 port of Freeciv)

[hop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Porting Gtk+ and the GIMP to win32 is being worked on at
http://user.sgic.fi/~tml/gimp/win32/. If I'm not mistaken some of the
changes he's made have been merged back into the main Gtk+ tree.

Justin Hopkins

At 09:59 PM 6/1/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi,
>
>As the person who put together the distribution for cygwin I can say that
>I'd be happy with a native port.
>
>However, I don't find cygwin to be too big or slow.  I run it all the time.
>I also no longer consider it beta quality (I have more problems with native
>NT).
>
>The Starnet server (http://www.starnet.com) may be used for an X server.
>
>I'm also looking into getting the freely distributable VNC server working.
>
>As for changes needed to the code, perhaps Xemacs would provide a good
>example
>since it now supports both X and native MS-Windows windowing.  Andy Piper
>has
>been doing some work recently trying to align them even more than they are
>currently.
>
>Can you explain how GTK+ works natively?
>
>Regards,
>
>Todd
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: freeciv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:freeciv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx]On
>> Behalf Of hop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 3:36 PM
>> To: freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [Freeciv] Native Win32 port of Freeciv
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I'm interested in doing a native Win32 port of Freeciv and I
>> just thought
>> I'd float this idea out to all you freeciv developers and
>> maintainers. My
>> reasons for wanting this over the freeciv/cygwin work at
>> http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Corner/2874/ are because
>> cygwin is
>> big, kindof slow, and still beta quality. Furthermore, the
>> cygwin/freeciv
>> stuff needs an X server to work, which will further slow it
>> down. (Not to
>> mention that you may need a commercial Xserver to get it working)
>>
>> So the real reason that I'm writing is because I'm wondering
>> how you would
>> react to this. Porting the client will require some
>> uncomfortable changes
>> to the code - either an abstraction layer implemented
>> differently by two
>> different sections of code (X11 and Win32 sections) or an
>> entirely different
>> distribution. Either way is fine with me, but if we go for
>> the separate
>> distribution thing, it'll be somewhat painful to move the
>> Win32 client from
>> version to version.
>>
>> Or, another option will be to use Gtk+ on win32 (which is
>> still beta), but
>> I'm not sure if this is the only non-portable section of the code.
>> Specifically,
>> I'm worried about the networking code on Win32.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Justin Hopkins
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>