Linux support

[blabno]

We need native linux wersion of EA or better wine support. What bothers me the most are problems with editing documentation templates. Besides, EA on wine is too slow.

[marcelloh]

You could try virtualbox ;-)

[jsbueno]

While we are at it - I've got it working tosome degree of sactisfaction with Wine - but I can't manage to connect to a DBMS for keeping the model.  Did you get to do it from within Wine?

[mrf]

There's a few packages you have to install for DBMS support. Namely

- mdac28 (Microsoft Data Access Components)
- dcom98 (Distributed Component Object Model)

We suggest using the winetricks script to manage your wine packages (available at http://kegel.com/wine/winetricks). If you can part with a few dollars, Crossover does all of this automatically for you (and takes all the pain of font management away as well :p).

We also have a wine installation document under development. If you would like to preview a copy of it, please send an email through to sparxsupport marked for my attention.

[Wowbagger]

I'd like to add my voice for asking for native Linux support - perhaps now that Qt is available under the LGPL it might be possible to port EA to Qt, and then have builds for Windows, *nix, and MacOS?

I think more and more developers - ESPECIALLY the types who would move to a UML process - are wanting to kick Microsoft to the curb (at least in the embedded systems space where I live).

[g.makulik]

Agreed Wowbagger!
Embedded development is much easier using a linux platform. I am pretty bothered about cygwin, mingw and all this 'bricolage' development environments. I am actually also using Windows when working on the EA model, because it works better than using EA under Wine. When I am going to implementation, I usually switch to my linux platform.

WBR
Günther

[Emilio]

As a former Linux enthusiast (note, I still think it is a far superior OS) I must say that was one of the reasons that also contributed to my "defection" to the Windows ranks. I got tired of working with incomplete clone applications that had portability problems...

Though Qt is good and there are plenty of others, the fact remains that the GUI frameworks used in Linux often follow the whims of people. As a result developers have to spend a lot of time maintaining code that becomes broken after a new GUI framework release.

I was formerly developing s/w for Linux using GTK (among many other frameworks I try and don't care to remember) and I remember every time I had to spend time on re-porting, time I could have better used to concentrate on the application itself.

Anyway, I probably get flamed to a roast by all Linux enthusiasts in this forum. Been there, done that, emigrated to Windows and I can live with it.

Sure, as a very sporadic Linux user I would also like an EA port. But frankly speaking if I was EA I would rather concentrate the resources on ironing out bugs and requests to improve the product (which is already FANTASTIC and my favorite) rather than spending a great deal of time in maintaining two code lines. EA was developed as a Windows application so I really don't think its original design accounts for separation of presentation layer.

[Matt Edwards]

As a former Linux enthusiast (note, I still think it is a far superior OS) I must say that was one of the reasons that also contributed to my "defection" to the Windows ranks. I got tired of working with incomplete clone applications that had portability problems...

Though Qt is good and there are plenty of others, the fact remains that the GUI frameworks used in Linux often follow the whims of people. As a result developers have to spend a lot of time maintaining code that becomes broken after a new GUI framework release.

I was formerly developing s/w for Linux using GTK (among many other frameworks I try and don't care to remember) and I remember every time I had to spend time on re-porting, time I could have better used to concentrate on the application itself.

Anyway, I probably get flamed to a roast by all Linux enthusiasts in this forum. Been there, done that, emigrated to Windows and I can live with it.

Sure, as a very sporadic Linux user I would also like an EA port. But frankly speaking if I was EA I would rather concentrate the resources on ironing out bugs and requests to improve the product (which is already FANTASTIC and my favorite) rather than spending a great deal of time in maintaining two code lines. EA was developed as a Windows application so I really don't think its original design accounts for separation of presentation layer.

What you say about GTK+ and other toolkits may be somewhat true, but QT is a stable commercially developed and supported toolkit. The era of application suites being married to one specific platform is drawing to a close.