Having tried various forms of building Coot, and looked at several
Linux and OS X system variants, I can assure you that an autoconf
build would fail most of the time due to missing dependencies. Coot
not only uses a lot of packages, it needs specific versions of many of
these packages. This means that an autoconfigure version has to have
a LARGE number of "--with-XXX=path" directives for those cases in
which Coot need a version of a package that is either newer or older
than that provided by the distro.
The build script has its own problems, since Paul doesn't have a
sourceforge-like build farm. It's still better than the alternatives
at this time.
Lynn Ten Eyck
On 14 Nov 2008, at 00:02, Tim Fenn wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:58:20 +0000 Kevin Cowtan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tim Fenn wrote:
Why does coot require a 3000 line hand written shell script to set
up the build process?
Well, if you look at the script (which I guess you have), then I
think you already have the answer... which suggests to me that I have
misunderstood the question. Maybe the question you are actually
asking is not the one which is obtained by a simple surface reading
of your message. Could you clarify perhaps?
It was rhetorical - why not just use autoconf to do all the dirty
work?
Also, is the idea to migrate all of the scripting away from guile and
towards python, or update the guile dependencies (as it seems goosh is
part of the os process module now, guile-gtk is deprecated in favor of
guile-gnome, guile net-http and guile-gui look unsupported...)? I'd
like to begin preparing a rpm for fedora (now that most of the
dependencies are part of the distributions), but their peer review
process might screen out unsupported deps...
Regards,
Tim
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Tim Fenn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stanford University, School of Medicine
James H. Clark Center
318 Campus Drive, Room E300
Stanford, CA 94305-5432
Phone: (650) 736-1714
FAX: (650) 736-1961
---------------------------------------------------------
