Hi, 1/ Thank you Artur Shepilko !In fact, I've noticed that issue and others issues in the past that I suppose are fixed (say glitches at this time), but I do prefer to wait for a 1.37 rock solid software.Not to mention that I've said that a 1.36.1 should be done for a better software.This would not happen of course... :-( Little Linux distro would be interested in a 32 bit static release of Fossil but that would not happen, either... (* sigh *) And people understands that you were serious ... At least I do.Again, thank you.
2/ Ah the DRH answer : I don't know what to say to that ...a) Short version :I do recommend you to read « Pride and Prejudice » [1]It's the best offer, I can do for you.I AM SERIOUS. b) Long version : > « [...] The existing download works great on the vast majority of Linux > desktops [...] » LOL (sarcastic answer).This convinces me that the best choice for a DVCS is Git for a [little] Linux Distro (more serious answer). > « [...] If we have separate builds for 64-bit and 32-bit Intel Fossil, what > about ARM? [...] » Did you ask someone for that ? Nope ? > « [...] Or Sparc? Or PowerPC. Hey, why no VAX build? [...] » Why not a cheeseburger as a chip ? Huh ? Are you serious ?Don't you have any strategy to respond to that ? And when the guy [Artur] said :> « [...] In case it's a question of man-power, I'd volunteer to correct this [etc...] » Is it not serious enough for you ? You do want what ? To be paid for it ?Hey man, isn't Fossil supposed to be a serious DVCS ? > « [...] And shouldn't we also then publish binaries with various compile-time > options enabled/disabled? Why no --json and --with-tcl builds? [...] » Really ? Is that serious as a question ? I was told that YOU are the man of Fossil, so YOU are the man that could decide.Your decision should be explained so every one is warned.Some people could think that they have a say in the Fossil realm, which is NOT the case. > « Rather than spend a lot of time generating and publishing an ever-growing > assortment of precompiled, I think the developers' time would be better spent > just making "./configure; make" work better/easier on all systems » Oh, I didn't know that you could not sometimes run a crontab job [2] to let the computer compile whatever is needed. Sorry you haven't hear about cron [3], I presume... ? > « [...] If "./configure;make" is not working for you, then by all means talk > about the problem and we will try to fix it. [etc...] » I like it : the guy explained that time is important but he doesn't bother if some people ask for help ...I guess that the average public targeted by Fossil would lose their so precious time to tell the Fossil team that it won't work.I suspected that the only thing they will do, note I say WILL, is NOT to come to Fossil again. Didn't I say that there are some serious communication issue ? Yes, I've said that ! > « [...] Linux and OpenBSD being obvious candidates since "./configure;make" > works so well on those platforms [etc...] » I've seen many software where the NIX* platform is ... freeBSD...It's nice for me [me = sarcasm] to read that FreeBSD are not a serious candidate for Fossil.Not astonished that people do not want to use Fossil... not as I expect. Ok, I have too high demand and I was wrong... Why don't you hire Warren for a simple job : Community Manager ? (* chuckle *)If I am serious about a CM, I am less when it comes to Warren... [1] Pride and Prejudice - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_and_Prejudice [2] AnaCron - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cron#Modern_versions « In 2007, Red Hat forked vixie-cron 4.1 to the cronie project and included anacron 2.3 in 2009 » [3] Cron - Wikipediahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cron « The software utility Cron is a time-based job scheduler in Unix-like computer operating systems. » Best Regards K. De : Richard Hipp <[email protected]> À : [email protected] Envoyé le : Mercredi 9 novembre 2016 21h44 Objet : Re: [fossil-dev] download page: Linux x86 inconsistent fossil binary (64bit vs. 32bit) On 11/9/16, Artur Shepilko <[email protected]> wrote: > > Seriously, guys, The existing download works great on the vast majority of Linux desktops. For the small minority where it doesn't work, "./configure; make" is an easy alternative. Where does one draw the line? If we have separate builds for 64-bit and 32-bit Intel Fossil, what about ARM? Or Sparc? Or PowerPC. Hey, why no VAX build? And shouldn't we also then publish binaries with various compile-time options enabled/disabled? Why no --json and --with-tcl builds? Rather than spend a lot of time generating and publishing an ever-growing assortment of precompiled, I think the developers' time would be better spent just making "./configure; make" work better/easier on all systems. We've already made a lot of progress in that area. Fossil has few external dependencies. More often than not "./configure;make" just works. If "./configure;make" is not working for you, then by all means talk about the problem and we will try to fix it. That complaint is much more likely to fall upon sympathetic ears. But I'm not particularly motivated to add an ever-growing assortment of precompiled binaries to the download page. If anything, I'd like to cull a few. Linux and OpenBSD being obvious candidates since "./configure;make" works so well on those platforms. -- D. Richard Hipp [email protected] _______________________________________________ fossil-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-dev
_______________________________________________ fossil-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-dev
