"Lars O. Grobe" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi! > > them could be useful as well. Maybe it is time to > > revisit possible issues with PDL for packagers. > > > Yes... having binaries including functionality (and all correct > dependencies) required by most users included in distributions for > Linux would solve most of the problems. > > Building would remain a task for people have specific needs for > extras, but such people tend not to have a problem with the built, > neither. So build documentation should focus mostly on packagers, > while most users should get pointed to binaries (current versions, > supported distributions and such).
I agree in principle. I only tried the source install because the Ubuntu version obviously had stuff missing (4 years old!!). However, I suspect you will find that getting every distribution to regularly update packages is a huge ton of work. I suspect that the "one-click" binary install idea is more practical in the long term. Daniel. _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
