On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 18:12 -0700, Matthias Koeppe wrote: > I repeat my strong objections to the proposed change -- which does not > solve any problems and only creates new ones. >
2, 4, 6, and 7 are addressed by Conda, Nix, Guix, Homebrew, or even Gentoo Prefix. These projects *want* to build entire distributions that run out of your home directory. > 5. The gcc spkg is specifically used in building the binary distribution. > Any discussion of removing the gcc/gfortran spkgs without including a > discussion of deployment as the binary package is incomplete. Availability > of the compilers at runtime is a key feature that we have advertised > through facilities such as the magic %cython directive and others. > Whoever is building the binary images could install a compiler into SAGE_LOCAL with "dpkg-deb -x" or whatever before they start. There's no need for it to come from an SPKG. The fact that we even have to consider these issues supports the claim that these packages are a maintenance burden. And, veering off-topic: Our binaries aren't really binaries in the traditional sense. We ship a 3GB image of an entire operating system. This could be done much easier by... shipping an image of an entire operating system: QEMU, VirtualBox, Docker, etc. You could tar up an entire Gentoo system with sage installed and it would probably take up less space than our existing binaries. Similarly, I'm sure we could tar up a Conda image where sage was installed and tell people to download that. Provide a launcher script and it would work out-of-the-box. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/381f2f471070a1192a1b7ba79799bfb3eee1acbd.camel%40orlitzky.com.
