Add support for building 3.1750.1738

[peters]

Build steps:

1. Download latest cef builds: 32-bit and 64-bit
2. Extract the files to their respective folders
3. .\build.ps1

I've disabled VS2010 build since i don't have a copy of it available, but you can simply uncomment it

Nuget packages for VS2012 / VS2013 (x86 & x64) are available here.

👯 💯

[peters]

Additional information is available here: #9

[peters]

I have also removed the binary files since github goes crazy when we are talking about blobs larger than 100MB. But it's maybe a 5 minute operation of manually downloading the binary files and extracting each of them to their respective folder.

Somebody should use bfg and prune all binary files.

[peters]

NB! If you need to test the VS2010 build you can simply run .\build.ps1 -Target vs2010

[peters]

/cc @amaitland @jornh

[peters]

I guess all that's remaining here is to have somebody that has a working VS2010 installation produce ze nuget package and we are good to go! IMHO i would drop support for v100 :))))))))

[amaitland]

@peters Awesome work, thanks!

I think there was some talk previously about dropping support for VS2010, I'm all for making the minimum VS2012, think that's more realistic.

@jornh What do you think about publishing a nuget package? I know #10 is something you were working on, do you think we should push that to completion first?

[amaitland]

I'm wondering if there's a way to fully automate the build process. How hard would it be for the psake script to download the relevant zip files and extract them? My only concern with this is getting around the captcha on the Cef download page.

Alternatively we could commit the zipped versions and have the script extract them, not nearly as nice, though somewhat in between the two solutions, more user/git friendly, fully automated.

I'd like to back port build.ps1 into the current branch, hopefully it's only a few minor tweaks. Also there's finishing off #10 so we have a full matrix of different options.

[peters]

@amaitland Automatic download of prerequisites is fixed in d4d6a15 :)

[amaitland]

@peters that should simplify the process 😄 Much appreciated!

[jornh]

@peters Awesome work, thanks!

Yes, awesome indeed! In particular the last commit reduced the 3 steps to just:
3) build.ps1

I like that you kicked out the big binary files. But in doing so you also broke the license url we use in the .nuspec files and broke the reference to the README from the FAQ wiki page in the CefSharp repo. Maybe the simplest fix is just to re-add everything but the binaries?

I think there was some talk previously about dropping support for VS2010, I'm all for making the minimum VS2012, think that's more realistic.

Agree, let's do it! If someone really needs to build CefSharp from source with VS2010 it's now super easy for them to make their own cef.sdk NuGet thanks to @peters script.

@jornh What do you think about publishing a nuget package? I know #10 is something you were working on, do you think we should push that to completion first?

Nah, I'm fine with getting this PR #11 in first. Either way one of the PRs need changes to fit with the other, might as well be PR #10 being rewritten...

[amaitland]

Nah, I'm fine with getting this PR #11 in first. Either way one of the PRs need changes to fit with the other, might as well be PR #10 being rewritten...

@jornh Any thoughts on a plan of action?

[amaitland]

I've created a branch on cef-binary and merged @peters changes in there

https://github.com/cefsharp/cef-binary/tree/cef-1750

Make sure his fine work gets included and can be easily referenced by others 😄

[jornh]

What are your thought on this:

I like that you kicked out the big binary files. But in doing so you also broke the license url we use in the .nuspec files and broke the reference to the README from the FAQ wiki page in the CefSharp repo. Maybe the simplest fix is just to re-add everything but the binaries?

I think with a solution to this it's ready for merge. So @amaitland please go ahead if you want.

Then if you can point me to a cef.redist NuGet built with VS2012 so we stay on VCRedist 2012 I will push that and cef.sdk for VS2012/13 to NuGet.org (I only have VS2013 on my machine).That should make @peters 1750 PR in the CefSharp repo go green.

Right? (Gotta' run for work now)

[amaitland]

@jornh Sounds like a plan, I'll merge this now, then fix the links in the .nuspec file, once that's done I can build a VS2012.

[amaitland]

@jornh I've built a VS2012 package, any suggestions on where I can upload it?

[jornh]

Great! If you create yourself a profile on www.nuget.org and/or http://staging.nuget.org (for practicing) I can add you as owner so you can nuget push them there. Or put them anywhere you've got like Dropbox, your myget feed, FTP or whatever you prefer.

[amaitland]

I've created an account on both, same username as on here. I'm happy to push a version to staging nuget. Then we can verify that it's ready for a wider release.

I tried uploading to myget, it got part way through the upload and cancelled, unsure if the file size was an issue, or if the amount of time it was taking was too long and it timed out.

[jornh]

U got mail from NuGet.org 😄

I had the same problem with push of the 1650 packages to NuGet.org :( that's another reason why I'm keen on the x32/x64 bit package split. If I remember correctly I think we rank as number 4 size wise on NuGet.org according to https://npe.codeplex.com/ ... Not exactly something to strive for 😜

Maybe there's a timeout setting on NuGet.exe? Still I'm a bit worried if people will get download problems too, but I guess most have better download than upload performance...

[amaitland]

Mail received 😄

I looked up NuGet.exe push timeout and it's 5mins, so I've upped that and trying to upload to staging now, see how I go 😄

[amaitland]

I got all the way through uploading only to get a permission error, I forgot to click the links in the email! lol

[amaitland]

Packages have been uploaded to staging, testing them out now.

[amaitland]

I'm getting this error when using the dll's produced by build.ps1

Error   10  error LNK2038: mismatch detected for 'RuntimeLibrary': value 'MTd_StaticDebug' doesn't match value 'MDd_DynamicDebug' in AssemblyInfo.obj)  CefSharp.Core

If I manually edit the libcef_dll_wrapper.vcxproj files and add DLL to the end of RuntimeLibrary everything works as expected.

@peters Any thoughts? Am I missing something? Everything worked when you built your nuget packages?

[peters]

@amaitland Hmm.. it is related to https://github.com/cefsharp/cef-binary/blob/master/build.ps1#L220. This only affects the x86 version right?

[amaitland]

Doesn't appear to work out of the box for either version. I take it you had no problems with yours?

[amaitland]

I've created PR #13 decided it was easy to just take the manual step of editing the project files and automate it.

I'm pushing another Nuget package to staging now.

[peters]

@amaitland Yup, it's a black box so i guess #13 is the best way to go about it. Simple as she goes 👍

[peters]

I'm pushing another Nuget package to staging now.

üüüü 👯