Using MacPorts to deploy Leo on macOS computers
Has anyone taken a recent look at MacPorts for deploying Leo? I know that using Homebrew to install Leo is the current recommendation. Homebrew has for years installed in */usr/local* on Intel Macs, and is now forced by Apple's tightening of access to that folder to install in */opt/homebrew* on Apple Silicon Macs, which come with *macOS 11* "Big Sur"; the recommendation for the Intel Mac remains */usr/local*. You might call me old school, but MacPorts is my preferred system for deploying open-source software on the Mac I live in for work. MacPorts already installs under */opt*, basing its filesystem hierarchy under */opt/local. *It can install precompiled binaries when available; it can compile everything from source code, pulling that from GitHub as needed. A custom installation can base the MacPorts filesystem in another folder underneath */opt*, such as */opt/leo-editor*. Such a custom installation requires compiling everything from source - no small job if one installs Python and Qt - but provides the option of installing Leo with all dependencies, keeping that installation independent of other software. I can forsee separate installations, one with custom installation under */opt/leo-editor *for work on development of Leo, one with the default installation under */opt/local* for day-to-day use. MacPorts is written to install without stepping on software bundled with the operating system - and without relying on Apple to deliver the most recent releases of that software (such as Python!). MacPorts has good support for Python and for Qt, and the range of software that it supports means that work is already done for supporting specific versions of Python and Qt. All that would be needed would be a "portfile" that tells MacPorts how to install Leo. It is possible to use MacPorts to deploy macOS Applications, which would in Leo's case be a launcher that would run the MacPorts-hosted Python and use that to launch the MacPorts-hosted Leo. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/83c29698-b31d-4ff2-be57-44695aa5da62n%40googlegroups.com.
Re: Discuss: remove @root?
On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 12:19 PM David Szent-Györgyi wrote: Would you like to have a copy of the LEO file that contains the repository? > You could see you my set-up. Yes. That would be helpful. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAMF8tS2xv1%3D4VN8cttwEt-56917NiRJNm4%3DeEasmUd86eyDadg%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: Discuss: remove @root?
Perhaps your current work would allow me to move to @file trees, removing my need for @root. I see in your recent posting "ENB: Aha re snippets, gnx's and literate programming" discussion of "snippets" that, if they work in @file trees, might offer some or all of the benefits of cross-file clones. If that were the case, could I use snippets to allow me to clone the contents of VBScript files and JScript files so that the contents of those files would be written to the WSF files? It would be easiest to use a single LEO file to host all the VBScript and JScript and the WSF files, but if that would break the machinery, I could set up separate LEO files: one for the library routines and management of the library, and one for each for the WSF files I am looking to build. The only requirement would be that I have a means of including the contents of the referenced VBScript file and JScript file in the WSF file that I save. If I could make either of the single-LEO-file scheme work or the one-LEO-file-for-library-and-one-LEO-file-per-WSF-file schemed work, I could abandon the @root directive. On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 1:19:28 PM UTC-5 David Szent-Györgyi wrote: > Would you like to have a copy of the LEO file that contains the > repository? You could see you my set-up. > > On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 11:47:19 AM UTC-5 Edward K. Ream wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:30 PM David Szent-Györgyi >> wrote: >> >>> Leo is your project, you provide free access to the fruits of your >>> labor, if you're going to remote @root that's your decision, but it may >>> cause me to ask questions I need answered if I am to preserve access to >>> work that I've done. >>> >> >> Please ask any questions you like. >> >> My question is this: what can you do with @root that is difficult or >> clumsy with @file? Can you provide an example of how you use @root? >> >> I've written about my use of Leo 4.3: it served as an easily deployed >>> tool for building utilities in the form of Windows Script Host files (WSF >>> files), and that I came up with a scheme that made it easy for me to use a >>> LEO file to hold the source code for the library of routines (in JScript or >>> VBScript) used by the WSF files as well as the source code for the >>> utilities I was building. Since each WSF file was independent and had to >>> include every library routine used therein, the libraries ended up written >>> to disk in multiple places in the various WSF files. >>> >> >> OK. >> >> These days, WSF files are frowned up on because script kiddies and other >>> malefactors used VBScript and similar technologies, so perhaps I shouldn't >>> care about preserving the ones I wrote, but I still use some of them >>> in-house, and they need maintenance; I don't want to lose access to my >>> Leo-based development environment if I can help it. >>> >> >> I'm not here to judge what people should be doing with Leo! >> >>> The last thing I would want to do would be cut myself off from Leo's >>> vibrant community; I am still a lone developer, working without help to >>> write utilities for work when I'm short of time for work as it is. That >>> said, if I must give up on using future versions of Leo, what do I do: pick >>> a version of Leo that is closest to my needs and create a fork? >>> >> >> Don't worry. Your objection will suffice to have Leo support @root >> indefinitely. If you don't mind, I'll add your name to the comments in >> leoTangle.py, to tell me, and future Leo devs, who's using this feature. >> >> Edward >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/97515aa4-f7a1-4ac9-80c2-4316d7c5d5fan%40googlegroups.com.
Re: Discuss: remove @root?
Would you like to have a copy of the LEO file that contains the repository? You could see you my set-up. On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 11:47:19 AM UTC-5 Edward K. Ream wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:30 PM David Szent-Györgyi > wrote: > >> Leo is your project, you provide free access to the fruits of your labor, >> if you're going to remote @root that's your decision, but it may cause me >> to ask questions I need answered if I am to preserve access to work that >> I've done. >> > > Please ask any questions you like. > > My question is this: what can you do with @root that is difficult or > clumsy with @file? Can you provide an example of how you use @root? > > I've written about my use of Leo 4.3: it served as an easily deployed tool >> for building utilities in the form of Windows Script Host files (WSF >> files), and that I came up with a scheme that made it easy for me to use a >> LEO file to hold the source code for the library of routines (in JScript or >> VBScript) used by the WSF files as well as the source code for the >> utilities I was building. Since each WSF file was independent and had to >> include every library routine used therein, the libraries ended up written >> to disk in multiple places in the various WSF files. >> > > OK. > > These days, WSF files are frowned up on because script kiddies and other >> malefactors used VBScript and similar technologies, so perhaps I shouldn't >> care about preserving the ones I wrote, but I still use some of them >> in-house, and they need maintenance; I don't want to lose access to my >> Leo-based development environment if I can help it. >> > > I'm not here to judge what people should be doing with Leo! > >> The last thing I would want to do would be cut myself off from Leo's >> vibrant community; I am still a lone developer, working without help to >> write utilities for work when I'm short of time for work as it is. That >> said, if I must give up on using future versions of Leo, what do I do: pick >> a version of Leo that is closest to my needs and create a fork? >> > > Don't worry. Your objection will suffice to have Leo support @root > indefinitely. If you don't mind, I'll add your name to the comments in > leoTangle.py, to tell me, and future Leo devs, who's using this feature. > > Edward > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/d2fe2977-3742-4175-8b07-89097882a10fn%40googlegroups.com.
Re: Discuss: remove @root?
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 11:30 PM David Szent-Györgyi wrote: > Leo is your project, you provide free access to the fruits of your labor, > if you're going to remote @root that's your decision, but it may cause me > to ask questions I need answered if I am to preserve access to work that > I've done. > Please ask any questions you like. My question is this: what can you do with @root that is difficult or clumsy with @file? Can you provide an example of how you use @root? I've written about my use of Leo 4.3: it served as an easily deployed tool > for building utilities in the form of Windows Script Host files (WSF > files), and that I came up with a scheme that made it easy for me to use a > LEO file to hold the source code for the library of routines (in JScript or > VBScript) used by the WSF files as well as the source code for the > utilities I was building. Since each WSF file was independent and had to > include every library routine used therein, the libraries ended up written > to disk in multiple places in the various WSF files. > OK. These days, WSF files are frowned up on because script kiddies and other > malefactors used VBScript and similar technologies, so perhaps I shouldn't > care about preserving the ones I wrote, but I still use some of them > in-house, and they need maintenance; I don't want to lose access to my > Leo-based development environment if I can help it. > I'm not here to judge what people should be doing with Leo! > The last thing I would want to do would be cut myself off from Leo's > vibrant community; I am still a lone developer, working without help to > write utilities for work when I'm short of time for work as it is. That > said, if I must give up on using future versions of Leo, what do I do: pick > a version of Leo that is closest to my needs and create a fork? > Don't worry. Your objection will suffice to have Leo support @root indefinitely. If you don't mind, I'll add your name to the comments in leoTangle.py, to tell me, and future Leo devs, who's using this feature. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to leo-editor+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAMF8tS25pe5Ui5MC5Qg5Kj%3DyQSjh-VycOGc%3D5dEUf%2BtwQ02O8w%40mail.gmail.com.
