[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity
From: |
Gabriel Dos Reis |
Subject: |
Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity |
Date: |
26 Apr 2006 19:57:53 +0200 |
"David MENTRE" <address@hidden> writes:
| Gaby,
|
| 26 Apr 2006 18:06:33 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis <address@hidden>:
| > Because I don't want to package it just for SuSE -- I might switch to or
| > acquire a new Unix variant in the future. Furthermore, I consider
| > that approach a rathole[1]: which version of SuSE? I certanly don't have
| > a standard SuSE installation and my working version is probably too
| > old by many standards.
|
| The SuSE package (or RedHat or whatever) won't appear by chance.
Wasn't that obvious? :-)
However, it is possible to talk the packaging people into doing half
of the work when most of all they need is already there (i.e. provided
by us).
| Packaging a software is a lot of *work*. If you don't do it, nobody
| will do it for you. Don't forget this is Free Software.
that might not be obvious, but yes, I have an idea and practice of
free software -- it is not just do it by yoruself or talk other people
into doing it for you. *In practice*, it is something in between.
For example, I don't package GCC; I just build the release tarball;
someone else package it because the necessary bits are already there.
I'm not saying you should not try to SuSE/Red Hat package. I'm saying
| > I want to have Axiom in a form where I could
| > just type "./configure; make; make install" and be done with it. See the
| > Autoconf suggestion in a different thread.
|
| See the guy who said that he would provide a first a configure.ac. ;-)
|
| > But I would
| > like Axiom to be better than that; that is the reason why I talked to
| > Benjamin Kosnik about distribution when we met two-three weeks ago. See the
| > "cross compilation issue" in another thread.
|
| RedHat *requires* cross-compilation capabilities. I'm not sure Axiom
| is able to do that.
The issue not whether Axiom can do that it its current form -- last
time, I tried, it can't. But, whether it can be made to do that.
| > I also briefly discussed
| > the issue with Paolo Carlini, fellow libstdc++ maintainer, working
| > for SUSE.
|
| So?
so, the executive summary is like for Red Hat.
| > [1] I had had a version of Maple working well till two years ago I
| > upgraded to a newer linux version that was using a new version of
| > glibc. My copy of Maple stopped working.
|
| Yes. This the reason that we are all working on Free Software and not
| proprietary one. But this has nothing to do with packaging issues.
It does: the root issue is *dependency*. It has little to do with
proprietary versus non-propriatry.
-- Gaby
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, (continued)
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, root, 2006/04/26
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, root, 2006/04/26
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/04/26
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, root, 2006/04/26
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/04/26
- RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Bill Page, 2006/04/26
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/04/26
- RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Bill Page, 2006/04/29
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Gabriel Dos Reis, 2006/04/29
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, David MENTRE, 2006/04/26
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity,
Gabriel Dos Reis <=
- Re: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Frederic Lehobey, 2006/04/26
- RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Bill Page, 2006/04/26
[Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, root, 2006/04/24
RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Page, Bill, 2006/04/25
RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Page, Bill, 2006/04/25
RE: [Axiom-developer] axiom opportunity, Page, Bill, 2006/04/25