IMHO this is the more important one for software that doesn't build
out of the box, binary packages are nice to have but it should be
possible to rebuild those without reinventing the wheel every time.
What I'd like to see is a collection of binary packages that are
created from a set of recipies (somewhat like what DarwinPorts
does, but without sucking in a second installation of unix). That
way it should be possible to (mostly) automaticly rebuild the
binary packages when new versions of software are released, and
when a new version of Python is released.
In an ideal world we'd have the same set of software available for
python 2.4, python 2.5 and Apple's python installation. The only
way to get there is by using a toolset that does most of the work,
manually building software and checking that everything still works
is too much work.
I use shell scripts to do such things even though there are far
better tools.
I like it because the shell is: ubiquitous, doesn't require special
tools or configs, is easy to comprehend, and is easy to modify when
things (as they always do) break as versions change.
wishful-thinking
It would be nice to have a set of tools like Fink does, only made for
building software in place.
/wishful-thinking
Somewhere on the web should be good enough, Google should be able
to find it then :-)
I have a .Mac home page I _never_ really use. Sound like a project to
go into the queue.
That reminds me, I need to do this for my universal PIL build for 2.4
as well lest the formula become lost in antiquity ;-)
On Jan 9, 2007, at 3:32, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
On 9 Jan, 2007, at 12:04, Daniel Lord wrote:
Ronald,
Yes I will. You raise a very good point about reproducibility.
I'll build a binary distro for those who want to keep it simple.
But I will also include an archive containing instruction, shell
scripts, env vars, and steps required to 'curl' the source and
build it from scratch.
IMHO this is the more important one for software that doesn't build
out of the box, binary packages are nice to have but it should be
possible to rebuild those without reinventing the wheel every time.
What I'd like to see is a collection of binary packages that are
created from a set of recipies (somewhat like what DarwinPorts
does, but without sucking in a second installation of unix). That
way it should be possible to (mostly) automaticly rebuild the
binary packages when new versions of software are released, and
when a new version of Python is released.
In an ideal world we'd have the same set of software available for
python 2.4, python 2.5 and Apple's python installation. The only
way to get there is by using a toolset that does most of the work,
manually building software and checking that everything still works
is too much work.
It requires just a bit of tweaking the CFLAGS and LDFLAGS ( for
gmp) and a one-line patch for the gmpy distro in cvs (1.02)
That would be an ideal things to also put in the Wiki were it not
in such sorry state.
I'd like to help with the Wiki, but I don't have the requisite
time to learn is admin nor do the content justice right now.
Somewhere on the web should be good enough, Google should be able
to find it then :-)
Ronald
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
