mingw libraries at opensuse (sticky request)

User contributed sources that have become inactive, deprecated, or generally unusable. But ... we don't really want to throw them away either.
Post Reply
AGS
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sep 25, 2007 0:26
Location: the Netherlands

mingw libraries at opensuse (sticky request)

Post by AGS »

I think it was TJF that once upon a time showed me that I could get win32 cross compiled binaries from an opensuse repository. As this repository contains quite a few usable libraries I think it might be a good idea to sticky a link to the repository.

What is on offer are
--> binary versions of libraries (win32) that will work in combination with the fbc (both import libraries and dlls).
The kind of libraries you'll find are big ones like the most recent GTK+ 3.x but also smaller ones like zlib;
--> binaries for utilities like agrep but also binaries for larger programs (gnumeric, abiword etc...)

The repository can be found at http://download.opensuse.org/repositori ... ry/noarch/

The reason why I want to have a sticky with a link to the opensuse repository is the fact that windows users are fairly unlikely to find this one by themselves. Few windows users will come up with the idea to turn to Linux to get binaries for their platform.
TJF
Posts: 3809
Joined: Dec 06, 2009 22:27
Location: N47°, E15°
Contact:

Re: mingw libraries at opensuse (sticky request)

Post by TJF »

Yes, I use this repo often to find binaries. It's most-at-one-place and virus-free. Therefore I agree, a sticky post or at least a link in the doku is a good idea.

Sometimes I heard that it's not so easy to extract the rpm achives (outside LINUX). Can you tell us which unpacking software you use, please?
counting_pine
Site Admin
Posts: 6323
Joined: Jul 05, 2005 17:32
Location: Manchester, Lancs

Re: mingw libraries at opensuse (sticky request)

Post by counting_pine »

Sitcky'd.
I also took the liberty of removing the manual line breaks in your post. (Do you compose your posts in Notepad? When Word Wrap is on, text is copied with line breaks inserted.)

(EDIT: apologies for removing the line wrapping. I don't fully agree, but I should have respected your decision.)
AGS
Posts: 1284
Joined: Sep 25, 2007 0:26
Location: the Netherlands

Re: mingw libraries at opensuse (sticky request)

Post by AGS »

Apologies for the very late reply.

The unpacker I use (os: win7\64bit) is peazip. When you open the package it's got a .cpio extension.

On the subject of line endings: I use programmer's notepad. I insert line endings myself as programmer's notepad does not do that for you. It simply wraps after 134 characters. By inserting newlines I thought I would get a better layout when posting a message. If I just keep on typing and let programmer's notepad take care of the wrapping I get whatever programmer's notepad produces. Which may not look all that good online.

This piece of text written on line with manual insertion of newlines.
The above text (from Apologies to online) I got from programmer's notepad.
I added a couple of newlines to it but other than that I copy - pasted it
and relied on word wrapping.

The main difference here is the length of lines. I am not 100% sure where
this forum wraps but by keeping lines short I can almost make sure it will
not wrap when I do not want it to wrap. Short lines tend to make a
text more readable. 134 characters on one line (the programmer's notepad
default) is just too much. The forum seems to wrap at 211 characters which
is beyond too much.

My text wraps at 73 characters (or something similar). From the web
(on the subject of 80 column text):
I think the practice of keeping code to 80 (or 79) columns was originally created
to support people editing code on 80-column dumb terminals or on 80-column
printouts. Those requirement have mostly gone away now, but there are still
valid reasons to keep the 80 column rule:
-- To avoid wrapping when copying code into email, web pages, and books.
-- To view multiple source windows side-by-side or using a side-by-side diff viewer.
-- To improve readability. Narrow code can be read quickly without having to scan your
eyes from side to side.
Which pretty much sums up the reasons for using a width of 80 characters.
Reason one (to avoid wrapping) is why I manually wrap to about 80 columns (give or
take 10 columns). And the improved readability is not to be forgotten either.

Human beings have a lousy set of eyes and helping those eyes out a bit
by wrapping at 80 characters is the humane thing to do :)

Aside: a fairly serious article on optimal line length
http://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability
TJF
Posts: 3809
Joined: Dec 06, 2009 22:27
Location: N47°, E15°
Contact:

Re: mingw libraries at opensuse (sticky request)

Post by TJF »

Thanks for the unpacker tip.

Regarding line length I agree, lines shouldn't be longer than 80 characters. It's not only moving the eyes from side to side, it's the hit rate to match the next line start after the line end. The longer the lines are and the longer the paragraph, the harder it gets to match the right one. That's why news papers use such a lot of columns.

But for me it's different in source code. In my code the normal flow runs from top to bottom. And exeptions run sidewards from left to right. I don't mind to code lines longer than 80 characters to keep this schematic assembly when an exeption needs some code to clean up.

Since at the forum source code and prose are mixed, IMHO it's a good idea to add manual line ends to support readability in the prose part and at the same time watch the code parts in full line length.
Post Reply