>>>we consider the DevKit to be deprecated
>>Who is/are "we"? In what way is The DevKit outdated?
>"we" as in we who get to face the daily stream of questions from
>users who get build failures when using it (on IRC and in the forums).
Feel free to offload the questions in my direction, perhaps long term
solutions will present themselves.
>It doesn't keep up with the changes so it frequently is unable to
>build Rockbox or the simulators, where a plain cygwin installation
>doesn't show these problems. Like with SDL right now.
To receive streams of questions on a daily basis, surely The DevKit
must be offering something that people want!? Even Cygwin has to be
updated from time-to-time.
>We also frown upon the scripts it encourages people to use. Things
>like 'rbconf' and similar make it really hard for users to
>understand what they're doing and for devs to understand the users.
"rbconf" is an alias for "../tools/configure"
If there are any others that you need to know about, please
ask. There are also docs in the root directory of the DevKit. Let
me know if I've missed anything.
>This, in combination with the recently offered packages for cygwin
>offered on rockbox.org, makes it a lot better for people to go the
>cygwin route once and for all rather than face repeated problems
>with the devkit.
Problems should NOT be repeating themselves. They should be fixed!
Try as I might I cannot get the specified list of packages to be the
only ones highlighted :(
>While you're at it, consider adding gdb to the package.
Yes. I have considered it many times. I just wonder how many DevKit
users would want, need or possibly even know how to use it.
>I have to agree with you on the installer. However, I can't really
>see the benefit of having to re-download and re-install your "lean
>and mean" kit when something is changed in Rockbox, as opposed to
>doing one "proper" install once and for all.
click ...10MB download ...click ...setup.bat ...click ...bash prompt
70MB (after install*) -vs- 300+MB**
tailored 'ls' colour scheme for rockbox
many handy rockbox-specific shortcuts
shell setup to interface with windows nicely (Eg. Ins==Paste; <- and
-> move the cursor, etc.)
*I plan to make this considerably smaller by adding the option to UPX
the files after install ...UPXing them before compression makes the
** dont recall the exact figure and I just erased my installation to
try and get an install setup as per the wiki
>Your kit my be small, but since you need to download the entire kit
>to update it, you will eventually end up downloading more than the
>actual cygwin installation would.
Again, I can but agree at one level ...A couple of times I have made
trivial updates (with major impact) and had to release the whole darn
thing again. :(
I have considered doing either base_install+update1+update2... and
also latest_version along with upgrade_pack. But the idea behind The
DevKit is "KISS".
I am happy to consider options, but until a good all-rounder
arrives. I think the weigh-off is fair. Is 10MB of bandwidth really
worth the trade off of complicating the install procedure?
>in the folder were the devkit 3.14 is located. So you can choose
>simulator->win32->SDL and will get no SDL related errors.
I'm getting some /tmp/CONFTEST-??? not found error in the configure
script ...it doesn't look SDL related, but I would prefer to see a
clean build on the next version of The DevKit before I release it.
>It works for me, but still no sound, I am missing something?
>Bluechip? Can you hear me?
I have yet to get a clean build (or more accurately 'configure')
under a full cygwin install (in the last couple of days), I will be
able to say more once things are running smoothly there.
>I wish I had used the "real" cygwin from the beginning and had to
>learn and u how it works (../tools/configure) and such cryptic stuff.
If you want to add the shortcuts to save typing/sanity/time ...it's
quite simple to put them into any cygwin install. If you desire that
knowledge, let me know and I'll dig out all the relevant stuff.
Received on Sat Feb 11 11:56:27 2006