Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Kevin Layer]

It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
speaking of this:

 https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip

Is there an equivalent build like this for 25.1?

Thanks.

Kevin

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Óscar Fuentes]

Kevin Layer <layer@known.net> writes:

> It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
> speaking of this:
>
>  https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip

I'm 99% sure that it was compiled with MinGW.

> Is there an equivalent build like this for 25.1?

What do you want, specifically?

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es>
> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 02:08:59 +0100
> 
> Kevin Layer <layer@known.net> writes:
> 
> > It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
> > speaking of this:
> >
> >  https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip
> 
> I'm 99% sure that it was compiled with MinGW.

I'm 100% sure.

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Fabrice Popineau]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 673 bytes --]

Non mingw32 would mean what ? MSVC compiled binaries ?
MSVC support has been dismissed quite a while ago.

Fabrice

2016-11-17 0:47 GMT+01:00 Kevin Layer <layer@known.net>:

> It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
> speaking of this:
>
>  https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip
>
> Is there an equivalent build like this for 25.1?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
>


-- 
Fabrice Popineau
-----------------------------
CentraleSupelec
Département Informatique
3, rue Joliot Curie
91192 Gif/Yvette Cedex
Tel direct : +33 (0) 169851950
Standard : +33 (0) 169851212
------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1749 bytes --]

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Phillip Lord]

On Wed, November 16, 2016 11:47 pm, Kevin Layer wrote:
> It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
> speaking of this:
>
> https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip
>
>
> Is there an equivalent build like this for 25.1?


Both builds (32 and 64 bit) for 25.1 use mingw.

I'd like to unpick a bit why you are asking the question, because it may
mean that our documentation or file naming is confusing.

Are you looking for a "standalone" emacs that can be installed without a
mingw or msys2 installation? If that is the case, the binaries provided
will do this job for you.

Are you worried about the altered directory structure (i.e. /var, /bin,
/etc)?

Do you have some other reason for not using ming compiled binaries?


Probably for future releases of windows binaries, I should drop the
"-ming" from the file name. It's not doing anything.

Phil

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Kevin Layer]

I've just never used the mingw32 binaries and the installation is more
complex.  I have been repackaging the older, single-zip binaries with
an NSIS installer, since it's just easier for Windows people to run an
exe to install.  The NSIS installer is here:

https://github.com/franzinc/emacsinstaller/

I'm just embarking on the task of updating it for 25.1, and wanted to
know if the old style binaries were just temporarily missing or gone
forever.  So, it's the latter.  I'll work to modify the scripts.

One question about the mingw32 emacs binary: is it like the Cygwin
emacs binary where it uses Cygwin mounts?  What I liked about the
native (MSVC) compiled emacs was that it used C:\... instead of /c/...

Thanks.

Kevin

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Phillip Lord
<phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, November 16, 2016 11:47 pm, Kevin Layer wrote:
>> It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
>> speaking of this:
>>
>> https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip
>>
>>
>> Is there an equivalent build like this for 25.1?
>
>
> Both builds (32 and 64 bit) for 25.1 use mingw.
>
> I'd like to unpick a bit why you are asking the question, because it may
> mean that our documentation or file naming is confusing.
>
> Are you looking for a "standalone" emacs that can be installed without a
> mingw or msys2 installation? If that is the case, the binaries provided
> will do this job for you.
>
> Are you worried about the altered directory structure (i.e. /var, /bin,
> /etc)?
>
> Do you have some other reason for not using ming compiled binaries?
>
>
> Probably for future releases of windows binaries, I should drop the
> "-ming" from the file name. It's not doing anything.
>
> Phil
>

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Óscar Fuentes]

Kevin Layer <layer@known.net> writes:

[snip]

> One question about the mingw32 emacs binary: is it like the Cygwin
> emacs binary where it uses Cygwin mounts?  What I liked about the
> native (MSVC) compiled emacs was that it used C:\... instead of /c/...

It seems that you are not informed about what MinGW is. The MinGW build
is as native as the MSVC one. It has nothing to do with Cygwin.

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kevin Layer <layer@known.net>
> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:54:55 -0800
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> I've just never used the mingw32 binaries and the installation is more
> complex.  I have been repackaging the older, single-zip binaries with
> an NSIS installer, since it's just easier for Windows people to run an
> exe to install.

The current binaries are also provided as a single zip file.  The
other zip file is for optional libraries that were not available with
previous versions (you needed to install them separately by
yourself).  If you don't want the optional libraries, you don't have
to install them.

> I'm just embarking on the task of updating it for 25.1, and wanted to
> know if the old style binaries were just temporarily missing or gone
> forever.

What are "the old style binaries"?

> One question about the mingw32 emacs binary: is it like the Cygwin
> emacs binary where it uses Cygwin mounts?  What I liked about the
> native (MSVC) compiled emacs was that it used C:\... instead of /c/...

No, MinGW produces native Windows executables.

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Kevin Layer]

Óscar and Eli, thanks.  I'll proceed with the mingw32 binaries.

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> From: Kevin Layer <layer@known.net>
>> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:54:55 -0800
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>>
>> I've just never used the mingw32 binaries and the installation is more
>> complex.  I have been repackaging the older, single-zip binaries with
>> an NSIS installer, since it's just easier for Windows people to run an
>> exe to install.
>
> The current binaries are also provided as a single zip file.  The
> other zip file is for optional libraries that were not available with
> previous versions (you needed to install them separately by
> yourself).  If you don't want the optional libraries, you don't have
> to install them.
>
>> I'm just embarking on the task of updating it for 25.1, and wanted to
>> know if the old style binaries were just temporarily missing or gone
>> forever.
>
> What are "the old style binaries"?
>
>> One question about the mingw32 emacs binary: is it like the Cygwin
>> emacs binary where it uses Cygwin mounts?  What I liked about the
>> native (MSVC) compiled emacs was that it used C:\... instead of /c/...
>
> No, MinGW produces native Windows executables.
>

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Richard Copley]

On 17 November 2016 at 21:46, Kevin Layer <layer@known.net> wrote:
> Óscar and Eli, thanks.  I'll proceed with the mingw32 binaries.
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>>> From: Kevin Layer <layer@known.net>
>>> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:54:55 -0800
>>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>>>
>>> I've just never used the mingw32 binaries and the installation is more
>>> complex.  I have been repackaging the older, single-zip binaries with
>>> an NSIS installer, since it's just easier for Windows people to run an
>>> exe to install.
>>
>> The current binaries are also provided as a single zip file.  The
>> other zip file is for optional libraries that were not available with
>> previous versions (you needed to install them separately by
>> yourself).  If you don't want the optional libraries, you don't have
>> to install them.
>>
>>> I'm just embarking on the task of updating it for 25.1, and wanted to
>>> know if the old style binaries were just temporarily missing or gone
>>> forever.
>>
>> What are "the old style binaries"?

The "old style" was what the old "install.bat" used to produce, before
you (Eli) reconciled the Windows build with the autotools build used
elsewhere.

Of course, the "old" and "new" builds are equally "native", and both
are/were made with MinGW. The most obvious difference is the
more unix-like directory structure (and the lack of a load-path
directory outside the installation directory by default -- not that I'm
complaining). Perhaps the OP was misled by that difference, and
mistakenly inferred that the end-product binary depends on
something like MSYS or Cygwin.

>>> One question about the mingw32 emacs binary: is it like the Cygwin
>>> emacs binary where it uses Cygwin mounts?  What I liked about the
>>> native (MSVC) compiled emacs was that it used C:\... instead of /c/...

Without wishing to confuse matters, there /is/ an Emacs that's
"native to MSYS" and uses MSYS-style mounts, but it's a different
beast. The MSYS package repository has three builds:

mingw32/mingw-w64-i686-emacs 25.1-1
mingw64/mingw-w64-x86_64-emacs 25.1-1
msys/emacs 25.1-1

The first two are native (to Windows) and are hardly patched from
upstream. They're very similar to the official FSF builds for Windows.
The third is "native to MSYS". Most people don't need it but it can
come in handy if you spend time in MSYS.

>> No, MinGW produces native Windows executables.

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Phillip Lord]

That's a very good addition, indeed. Installers are certainly a more
familiar way for windows users to install things.

Let me know if you have any problems with the binaries as they are.


Kevin Layer <layer@known.net> writes:

> I've just never used the mingw32 binaries and the installation is more
> complex.  I have been repackaging the older, single-zip binaries with
> an NSIS installer, since it's just easier for Windows people to run an
> exe to install.  The NSIS installer is here:
>
> https://github.com/franzinc/emacsinstaller/
>
> I'm just embarking on the task of updating it for 25.1, and wanted to
> know if the old style binaries were just temporarily missing or gone
> forever.  So, it's the latter.  I'll work to modify the scripts.
>
> One question about the mingw32 emacs binary: is it like the Cygwin
> emacs binary where it uses Cygwin mounts?  What I liked about the
> native (MSVC) compiled emacs was that it used C:\... instead of /c/...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 6:58 AM, Phillip Lord
> <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Wed, November 16, 2016 11:47 pm, Kevin Layer wrote:
>>> It seems 24.3 was the last version that had non-mingw32 binaries.  I'm
>>> speaking of this:
>>>
>>> https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/emacs-24.3-bin-i386.zip
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there an equivalent build like this for 25.1?
>>
>>
>> Both builds (32 and 64 bit) for 25.1 use mingw.
>>
>> I'd like to unpick a bit why you are asking the question, because it may
>> mean that our documentation or file naming is confusing.
>>
>> Are you looking for a "standalone" emacs that can be installed without a
>> mingw or msys2 installation? If that is the case, the binaries provided
>> will do this job for you.
>>
>> Are you worried about the altered directory structure (i.e. /var, /bin,
>> /etc)?
>>
>> Do you have some other reason for not using ming compiled binaries?
>>
>>
>> Probably for future releases of windows binaries, I should drop the
>> "-ming" from the file name. It's not doing anything.
>>
>> Phil
>>

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Phillip Lord]

Richard Copley <rcopley@gmail.com> writes:
> Without wishing to confuse matters, there /is/ an Emacs that's
> "native to MSYS" and uses MSYS-style mounts, but it's a different
> beast. The MSYS package repository has three builds:
>
> mingw32/mingw-w64-i686-emacs 25.1-1
> mingw64/mingw-w64-x86_64-emacs 25.1-1
> msys/emacs 25.1-1
>
> The first two are native (to Windows) and are hardly patched from
> upstream. They're very similar to the official FSF builds for Windows.
> The third is "native to MSYS". Most people don't need it but it can
> come in handy if you spend time in MSYS.


I think for 25.2 I should change the name of the zip files on
ftp.gnu.org. The "mingw-w64" addition is not really necessary and might
well cause confusion.

Phil

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Richard Copley]

On 20 November 2016 at 21:24, Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
> Richard Copley <rcopley@gmail.com> writes:
>> Without wishing to confuse matters, there /is/ an Emacs that's
>> "native to MSYS" and uses MSYS-style mounts, but it's a different
>> beast. The MSYS package repository has three builds:
>>
>> mingw32/mingw-w64-i686-emacs 25.1-1
>> mingw64/mingw-w64-x86_64-emacs 25.1-1
>> msys/emacs 25.1-1
>>
>> The first two are native (to Windows) and are hardly patched from
>> upstream. They're very similar to the official FSF builds for Windows.
>> The third is "native to MSYS". Most people don't need it but it can
>> come in handy if you spend time in MSYS.
>
>
> I think for 25.2 I should change the name of the zip files on
> ftp.gnu.org. The "mingw-w64" addition is not really necessary and might
> well cause confusion.

OK, but to clarify, the three names I quoted above are the package
names on MSYS2, and all the packages there are prefixed in the same
way. But that's according to some schema that's operative for them --
no reason to cargo-cult it into Emacs.

But is it worth looking into whether there's a more-or-less
established convention that could be said to apply to the binaries
available on ftp.gnu.org?

Re: Are there non-mingw32 binaries for Windows?

[Phillip Lord]

Richard Copley <rcopley@gmail.com> writes:

> On 20 November 2016 at 21:24, Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk> wrote:
>> Richard Copley <rcopley@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Without wishing to confuse matters, there /is/ an Emacs that's
>>> "native to MSYS" and uses MSYS-style mounts, but it's a different
>>> beast. The MSYS package repository has three builds:
>>>
>>> mingw32/mingw-w64-i686-emacs 25.1-1
>>> mingw64/mingw-w64-x86_64-emacs 25.1-1
>>> msys/emacs 25.1-1
>>>
>>> The first two are native (to Windows) and are hardly patched from
>>> upstream. They're very similar to the official FSF builds for Windows.
>>> The third is "native to MSYS". Most people don't need it but it can
>>> come in handy if you spend time in MSYS.
>>
>>
>> I think for 25.2 I should change the name of the zip files on
>> ftp.gnu.org. The "mingw-w64" addition is not really necessary and might
>> well cause confusion.
>
> OK, but to clarify, the three names I quoted above are the package
> names on MSYS2, and all the packages there are prefixed in the same
> way. But that's according to some schema that's operative for them --
> no reason to cargo-cult it into Emacs.


Sure, I understand that. I'm not sure where I got it from. Probably,
approximately the same place.


> But is it worth looking into whether there's a more-or-less
> established convention that could be said to apply to the binaries
> available on ftp.gnu.org?

It would be, and I shall.

Phil