On Fri, 2010-01-08 at 07:10 -0800, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > On Jan 8, 11:02 pm, Dag Sverre Seljebotn <da...@student.matnat.uio.no> > wrote: > > On Fri, 2010-01-08 at 06:51 -0800, dimpase wrote: > > > > > On Jan 8, 9:59 pm, kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > no, it doesn't give you *any* reasonable figures, at all! > > > > > In fact, I am sure lots of people (a vast majority) are running Cygwin > > > > > (or Mingw - a clone of Cygwin) apps on their Windows boxes without > > > > > even realising this. Cygwin works quietly behind the scenes here. > > > > > > That is very interesting. When you say "a vast majority", can you > > > > give an example of a specific application people are using? That > > > > could be good to know about. > > > > > a good and relevant to Sage example is GAP (which is also available > > > from within Sage) > > > A binary distribution of GAP for Windows consists (apart from the > > > common to all platforms code in GAP language etc) of an executable > > > built in Cygwin environment and linked against the Cygwin DLL, and the > > > latter DLL itself (and a DOS batch file to start the thing up). > > > That's all you need to run GAP on Windows, no fullblown Cygwin > > > environment is needed. > > > (you can try it yourself:www.gap-system.org) > > > > > > Also, from earlier in the discussion it sounded like it was possible > > > > to make Sage-Cygwin be a one-step download, e.g. > > > > > > 1. Download sage-cygwin.msi > > > > 2. Double click and click through an install process > > > > 3. Click the icon for sage-cygwin and begin using Sage > > > > > > If that is possible, that would be fantastic. Up to now my > > > > understanding was that one first had to download Cygwin and install/ > > > > configure it, then download the Sage install and hope that it > > > > cooperated with Cygwin on one's computer. > > > no, I don't see any reason for this being impossible (see above). GAP > > > is basically like this, although it's packaged using zip... > > > > Well Sage is a bit different than this because you'd want the full set > > of tools for easy porting of SPKGs -- bash, tar, make, gcc, ... > > well, that's if you want to do Sage development, isn't it? > (I'd be surprised if Sage needs a gcc compiler for a binary install)
Well, the installation of optional SPKGs currently relies on the availability of a compiler. If you are happy with loosing optional SPKGs then you are right. In theory one could introduce the concept of "binary SPKGs" (though I'd take a hard look at alternative, pre-written distribution mechanisms first). Dag Sverre
-- To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-support+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org
