default configuration(s)

[boykobb]

I have noticed that, under Windows, C::B would respect a default.conf file in .../Application Data/codeblocks/ even if one has such a file in the base C::B directory.  This seems to me like an erroneous behaviour, as it is then not possible to have a portable or copiable, i.e. self-contained, version of C::B, like the one suggested near the end of 1.10.4 of the User Manual.

[oBFusCATed]

C::B supports portable usage on Windows, search the forum for Portable.

[MortenMacFly]

I have noticed that, under Windows, C::B would respect a default.conf file in .../Application Data/codeblocks/ even if one has such a file in the base C::B directory.  This seems to me like an erroneous behaviour, as it is then not possible to have a portable or copiable, i.e. self-contained, version of C::B, like the one suggested near the end of 1.10.4 of the User Manual.

If both configuration files are present, that's the expected behaviour.

[boykobb]

C::B supports portable usage on Windows, search the forum for Portable.

I did search, but I couldn't find what I need.
What I would like is a C::B that could be copied all to a single (any) folder, along with its own default.conf in the same folder, and independent of .conf files that may be residing elsewhere.  Is that possible to do?  Thanks.

[oBFusCATed]

Have you read this whole topic: http://forums.next.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,10360.0.html ?

[boykobb]

Have you read this whole topic: http://forums.next.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,10360.0.html ?

Yes – and it was all useless to me.
What is being discussed there is a separate program that:
• one must use to launch C::B instead of launching C::B directly;
• is not part of C::B, and (as I understand it) is not guaranteed to work with future versions of it;
• does things I am not sure of what they are, and I cannot observe or change;
• probably still contains bugs (we don't know).

In fact, there is a much better solution for what that launcher does: launching C::B with a non-default personality.  A .bat or .lnk file would suffice to implement this.  Unfortunately, one can still not guarantee that C::B can only be launched that way.

A cleaner solution would not need to rely on conventions, just on (pre)configuration of C::B.

[Alpha]

If you are fine with the way PortableApps.com applications work, you could try Code::Blocks Portable.  It is still a development test (and possibly abandoned??), however, if you make the one change mentioned in the comments, it works perfectly fine (you can even replace the internal Code::Blocks with an SVN build).