[Xastir] Better and/or Easier Way to Get Xastir on Windows

[Curt, WE7U]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Tom Russo wrote:

> Keep it as a library, use a local installed version if it's there, build our
> own if and only if necessary and link against it statically in that case.
> If we keep it in a separate directory, it eases the maintenance headache.

I'm game for this.  It also occurred to me that someday we may wish
to use an alternative library for Shapefile support, like perhaps
OGR.  It'd behoove us to keep Shapelib separate from our code for
that reason alone (Aren't you impressed that I found a use for the
word "behoove"?).


> But if we do it right, there's no need to link our own private copy if there's
> already one.  And if we do link against our private copy statically, there
> is no problem if the user later installs an incompatible shared-library version.
> The static-linked version will be fine until the user updates xastir and
> reconfigures, at which point the newly installed shared-library version will
> be used instead.

Yep.  I think that'd be spiffy (It must be "old words" day!).

While we're on the subject, could this be extended to any of the
myriad other libraries that we use?  If we intend to have Shapelib
always be present (a really great idea), it would at least be nice
to have all of the Shapefile-related options turned on too (Berkeley
DB/PCRE/rtree).

If we could get libtiff/libproj/libgeotiff, AX.25, libcurl,
GDAL/OGR, GPSMan/gpsmanshp support in there too, so much the better.

I'll be happy with Shapelib for now though.  Shapefile options would
be next in line.

So... How do we approach this, and who wants to do it?

--
Curt, WE7U.   APRS Client Comparisons: http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"