Version 1.39 of Boost isn't in Ubuntu currently, so there's nothing to link to that way. I assume you mean doing something like folding Boost into the TPP/extern directory and handling Boost as libexpat is handled, for example. I'm not completely unsympathetic to this idea, but on the whole I'm against this. Having your own local copy means supporting your own local copy, which translates into more work (which I don't like to do :-).
As to whether it's worthwhile to package TPP for Linux, I don't know. I've been trying to help out Eliza, who would clearly benefit. I'd have probably tried out TPP sooner myself if there had been an easily installed Linux package. But are there really a lot of potential users, and does the TPP project care about reaching them? I don't even know how large the Windows user community is. As to volunteering, it's not out of the question. It'd depend on the above (whether it's really worth doing). Also, I think that in order to make this work well, we'd really want to separate TPP from its dependencies. That is, rather than including expat (for example) in the TPP source tree, instead have each version stipulate that it depends on version X of expat (or more typically, version X or later). I think this would greatly simplify the packaging task. (You could still provide an auxilliary tarball of the dependencies for Windows users, but Linux users would get them "for free" as part of their distribution.) That's my thought. Does it sound radical? Mike On Sep 8, 11:05 am, Matthew Chambers <matthew.chamb...@vanderbilt.edu> wrote: > If TPP would link to boost statically it wouldn't be an issue. But IIRC > there has been a thread on this topic before and it wasn't deemed worth > the effort of maintaining...unless you're volunteering? ;) > > -Matt > > Mike Coleman wrote: > > Has there been any thought about packaging up TPP for Ubuntu/Debian > > and possibly RedHat/CentOS? > > > I went through the exercise of installing it from scratch, following > > the directions on the wiki page, and I can imagine that this would be > > quite daunting for a non-programmer. > > > Just off the top of my head, it looks like the main problem to solve > > will be that TPP is tending to rely on bleeding-edge versions of the > > Boost libraries. Is there any chance that a change could be made to > > stick with versions that are merely reasonably current (and thus > > packaged)? (Ubuntu Jaunty has 1.37, for example.) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "spctools-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to spctools-discuss@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to spctools-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spctools-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
