Re: portable application

Hi,

I don't think it's a big thing to recompile.I'm just a lazy
man,:).Actually I can solve the most problems if encountering them.

But lazy in your case would be to go the easy way and recompile ;-)

Maybe because I like to use the portable applications on windows.But

Well, on Windows, there are many differences... First of all, you can
assume to have the same hardware (ix86). You have the same versions of
DLLs on all systems (or at least you hope you do, there is no way to
check for versions of DLLs I know of) Then the major problem in getting
your app portable in Windows is to uncouple it from registry, fixed
paths and not installed DLLs.

this is Linux and there are so many distributions.I'll change my mind
to recompile them.Thanks.

It's not only the distributions... With Linux you can almost not assume
any hardware - you can have ix86, amd64, PowerPC, Sparc... The beauty of
Linux is, you have a custom-compiled version for that platform (which
provides much better optimization than to run a xi586 application on
amd64 - as Windows does). Or you might even compile and run your app on
a non-Linux based system such as Solaris or *BSD. Again, you cannot
assume fixed paths then - so most app's are written to be relocated at
compile or install time (e.g. /usr, /usr/local, /opt, /home/user/bin...).

Also, there is constant evolution in Linux systems, which provides for
new versions of all libraries frequently - in turn providing the need
for versioning all libraries and for choosing the library version on
compile time...

So basically, Windows and Linux are built on so different philosophies
that it's hard to compare them - I did experience that the other way
round - after about ten years on Linux alone I had to use Windows again
at work (school and study time was over). I'm still running into
problems on Windows which result from that philosophy thingy ;-)

Ciao....
.

Relevant Pages

  • Commercial Software
    ... vexed by the gnu licenses covering their glibc libraries. ... to port my software to linux, I have to write my own libc libraries (which ... The popularity of an operating system depends on the number ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: OpenGL extensions in Linux (Its not hard?)
    ... Your problem is not OpenGL extensions. ... MS Windows, that is _one_ OS with various hardware it supports. ... versions of Linux ... How many of these libraries does GLUT require? ...
    (comp.graphics.api.opengl)
  • Re: Games made with BBC BASIC for Windows
    ... run on any version of Linux, ... Sure - and how many people write installer apps? ... libraries (which shouldn't be necessary with Windows). ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.misc)
  • Re: Green Hills CEO: Linux threat to free world!
    ... Please let me know whether you wish to discuss Linux vs. Windows ... call to any libraries or other shared code. ... Recompile your apps with static linking and they won't need libraries. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: C++ compilers on Linux supporting 64bit architecture?
    ... BB> porting issues moving it from Windows to Linux, ... SV> That depends upon what libraries your C++ code uses. ... for all of our GUI development in C++. ... No code modifications are required to build the apps on Windows vs. ...
    (Fedora)