Stop saying C::B is cross-platform. It's only Window's. Period.

[juanfal]

You want users to participate in the development of C::B but, how, where are the guidelines… how to compile it, what does it depend on… Every new nightly build is always in binary for windows, no Linux nor Mac versions… no hints.

A cross-platform compiler? 

I'm now understanding why the logo of C::B is all the same colours as the window's

[MortenMacFly]

You should start reading the development sections of the WiKi. If something is missing, ask in the forums or just add it yourself (it's a WiKi).

And nightlies are very often also for other platforms in the same forum thread, just not in the first post.

[yvesdm3000]

I use it on Linux. I don't see a problem ?

Yves

[oBFusCATed]

A cross-platform compiler? 

C::B is not a compiler. Why do you mention this?

For the record C::B works just fine on linux.
To compile it there are two ways:
1. use codeblocks and the supplied projects
2. use the autotools build system, this one is preferred on linux for making installable builds.

[thomas]

Indeed, it works better under Linux than under Windows...

You have readily working 1-2 day old builds available by typing apt-get install codeblocks or its equivalent if you use a different packet manager. Building from source works just fine but is unnecessary unless you really want to do active development.

Being someone who actually wanted to do some active development again after a longer pause, I've been trying to get a working Windows SVN-trunk build together for months, without success (using both the most recent MinGW-builds and TDM compilers, using wx2.8 and 3.0, in 32 and 64 bit). When I say "working", I mean one that the build succeeds in the first place (that sounds like something that should be taken for granted, but I cannot even testify that) and one that doesn't have random, visual editor selection glitches and one that doesn't crash when you type a particular kill sequence.

So... no, Windows most definitively is not the only, or even preferred platform.

[oBFusCATed]

Interesting, I've been able to resurrect my win32 devs pretty easily. I'm using everything at their latest versions I think (tdm, wx3, etc). But I'm using a night build to develop:)

[thomas]

Using rev. 10081 built with TDM 4.9.2 here as "production version" (this is the latest build, almost a year old, which works without any problem whatsoever).

What's funny is that I'm doing the exact same steps as before (I'm building wxWidgets with a batch file, so it's certain I'm using the same flags and all, and for building Code::Blocks I'm using the project file). Building Code::Blocks invariably gives me include errors (those are trivial to fix, but I'm surprised where they come from!) and sometimes missing vtables on TinyXML::Document (huh, wtf?), and sometimes other stuff. Which, frankly, makes no sense at all.

Now, if Code::Blocks wasn't the only software that doesn't build, I'd say my compiler is broken.

Then, if I manage to build, selecting something draws weird stuff (selecting two and a half lines instead of what I'm selecting) and the like. Or typing <return>-<return>-<tab> causes a silent crash, but not every time. Only when you haven't saved for 10 minutes and really don't feel like losing your work, it happens.

It's really odd, and I have no idea what to do about it.

[thomas]

So, I tried again. And got a version together that seems to work.

Building the wx28 version does not work with r10081 due to incorrect use of include paths. My theory: At some point in between 10081 and 10554, someone made a not-backwards-compatible change to the compiler and did not properly update the project file. Or something. Or actually, they probably did make a change to the project file, but older versions which work differently are unable to work with that.

Building the wx30 version works using r10081 with TDM-4.9.2, but is broken (selections are working "weird" to say the least, and occurrence highlighting is totally fucked up). However, building the wx28 version with the broken wx30 version works, and produces a binary that apparently works fine. At least, it passed a 5-minutes test without doing anything funny.

EDIT:
Using either of the working r10554 versions to build r10554 using TDM-5.1 works, but results in a totally-fucked-up editor.

[oBFusCATed]

Thomas: Have you tried a nightly? If not can you try. Just to rule out some problem with your setup.