Hi Al and all,
[snip]
>My first thought was that will drive you crazy. Second thought
>was maybe with static linking it might work. Third thought
Static linking is a lost cause unfortunately. I have completely
abandoned going down this path after spending way too much time
discovering all the various gotchas/issues myself.
>reminds me that you are using guile, so you now need to
>maintain a dozen static linked variants of guile.
Nah, I don't think it is really that complicated. I "think" I have
figured out (and mostly prototyped) how to build a set of gEDA/gaf
(and some of the other suite programs) binaries and the necessary
dependancies to work on every (most) Linux distributions from RH7.2
and up. Quite the claim, yes. :) Can I demonstrate/prove it? Yes,
but not until I get the next version of gEDA/gaf out. Of course, I may
run into more "snafus" that could completely derail my carefully layed
out plans. I've already been derailed a few times, but so far I've
found satisfactory workarounds/solutions to the cows on the tracks. :)
>I think we need to go back to the essence of free software, or
>open-source if that is your preference. If you have source you
>can deal with the issues, and leave it at that.
Stuart has been running an experiment for the past year or so
with his source driven installer and we have realized that building
from source (even in the most controlled circumstances) on a bunch of
different user machines hasn't always worked (much to our surprise).
Is that a fair statement, Stuart?
Really, the end result of all this is a way of distributing
the gEDA Suite in a way that minimizes distribution/installation pain
for everybody involved and allows the developers to fully concentrate
on actually working on the software.
-Ales
