(no subject)

[ewx]

I have a C++ program which works under Linux and MacOS (and will probably port nicely to other UNIXes). I also have a Windows XP system, which I want to run it on.

What's the most convenient way to get a C++-friendly build environment on Windows, preferrably without paying anything and preferrably without incurring a (runtime) dependency on Cygwin? I don't need (or particularly want) an IDE.

(The program in question being my backup software. Linux's NTFS implementation does not cut the mustard.)

Comments

[arnhem.livejournal.com]

Why not cross-compile for windows on a unix box? eg mingw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MinGW) as ported to linux or bsd ...

[ewx.livejournal.com]

That looks like just the ticket.

[nunfetishist.livejournal.com]

Ubuntu certainly has pre-packaged MinGW-based cross-compilers, so I assume Debian does, too.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

Yup, had a look and installed them as soon as MinGW was mentioned.

[sparrowsion]

g++ (and ISTR you need ar and possibly make) from MinGW running in a Cygwin environment. MinGW make is a Good Thing anyway.

A Visual C++ is available not-for-money these days. However, I understand it doesn't have all the optimisation features as the for-money one. No idea how it matches up to the MinGW g++. And setting up your environment to use it as a command line tool can be a bit of a pain.

[armb.livejournal.com]

> A Visual C++ is available not-for-money these days.

Yep, "Express Edition": http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/default.aspx

[3c66b.livejournal.com]

I realise upgrading your kernel to solve this might be overkill, or cause other problems, but Linux's NTFS implementation has moved on a bit since 2.6.8.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

I used to try to keep up with 'stable' kernels but it's no longer clear to me what the non-vendor stable kernels are any more. Certainly they are not the things kernel.org calls stable, one of which munched a bunch of files recently, causing me to exercise said backup software.

I want security updates, so picking a 2.6.something that works and sitting there isn't an option.

Consequently I've switched back to Debian's kernel.

[3c66b.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. I haven't had any problems with recent kernels, but I too am sticking to Debian kernels unless I absolutely have to, for the same reason.

[gerald_duck]

Given that you have a Windows XP licence (or are already willing to pretend that you do), you might want to try Captive instead. That uses the real Windows NTFS.SYS and NTOSKRNL.EXE to do the job.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

...which appears to require FUSE, which it says is only found post 2.6.14, which gets us back to the conversation with Martin above.

[gareth-rees.livejournal.com]

I second the recommendation of Microsoft Visual Studio Express Edition.

[sesquipedality.livejournal.com]

MS give away Visual C++ Starter Edition (or something of that ilk) for free these days. You may have to install the IDE, but I don't think you're forced to use it.

Try http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/

[mstevens.livejournal.com]

The free Visual Studio thing everyone else is suggesting?