Re: Multiple Octave versions in one MXE-Octave installer

[PhilipNienhuis]

PhilipNienhuis wrote
> (The below is a work in progress. As I won't have much time until 
> mid-May and I don't know if other people deem it worthwile, I just 
> report about a few initial steps.)
> 
> Some months ago I started experiments with integrating multiple Octave 
> versions into one and the same MXE installer. As the MXE installer more 
> or less puts a mini *nix-system in place, and multiple Octave versions 
> can coexist peacefully on plain *nix, I figured this should be a piece 
> of cake on Windows as well.
> Other motives:
> 
> - Conserving some disk space (an mxe-octave built binary installation is 
> about 750+ MB, Octave itself is altogether a mere 95+ MB)
> 
> - Easier testing of OF packages across multiple Octave versions (in 
> /share/ (/usr/local/share) and in /lib/ (/usr/local/lib) there's one O-F 
> package dir for multiple Octave versions)
> 
> - (Maybe in the future)  Preparations / Options for lightweight 
> installers that just add or upgrade only a new Octave version itself 
> into an existing mxe-octave installation. Looks ideally suited for 
> development versions - it would save lots of waiting time before a patch 
> can be tested.
> BTW: this isn't only suited for multiple-octave installations; in 
> principle it could be done right now as well.
> 
> 
> I also figured it would be preferrable to start Octave through batch 
> files rather than through direct "shortcuts" to the executables, because:
> 
> - This provides a great way to avoid clobbered up Windows PATHs (the 
> ones polluted with all kinds of junk SW interfering with Octave's
> execution)
> 
> - It makes it fairly easy to separate multiple Octave versions installed 
> in one and the same mxe-octave directory (see below).
> 
> 
> I didn't yet dive into the makefiles, first I wanted to check if my idea 
> would work at all. So it invoked a bit of manual intervention in the 
> mxe-octave build chain (i.e., on my Linux build box), as follows:
> <snip>


First of all, I'd like to emphasize that this joke is pimarily meant to
simplify and speed up development of Octave on Windows esp. when
cross-building.

Some simple makefile patches are on the tracker now (see
https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?8469)
Batch files to start Octave are included there as well. 
A little issue is ghostscript; I've added my own installation in the PATH
command in the batch file so that has to be amended. 
I looked into somehow including a ghostscript installer in mxe but didn't
get much progress.
I remember from last year JWE's comment that ghostscript was still
problematic. AFAICS that could be because the ghostscript web site only
releases binary installers and no zipped archives; with windows archive
tools those binary installers are easily unzipped, but not so with
msys/mingw tools. And maybe the Affero GPL license is insufficiently
compatible?

Anyway, I've experimented with 3.8.1, 3.9.0+ and 4.1.0+ in one installer,
and that generally works well.
Later I decided to throw out 3.8.1 as it isn't fully binary compatible with
3.9.0+ onward; a notable symptom is that the OF windows package installed in
3.8.1 doesn't work in 3.9.0+ & up, and vice versa - something with the
generated .oct files not recognized by the loader. 3.9.0+ and 4.1.0+ are
fully compatible.

A full 3.8.1/3.9.0+/4.1.0+ installation on Windows requires ~950 MB (1.07 GB
after all included OF packages have been built & installed). Comparing that
to three times an average single-version mxe installer (~750 MB) I see a
fair amount of disk space saving.

A next step would be to just generate the <mxe-octave>/octave tree (that is,
the octave/..../i686-w64-mingw32 part) and "install" that over an existing
Octave-Windows installation.
After all it's just the Octave files that get updated, the dependencies and
rest of the msys/mingw setup won't change much - if you don't update the mxe
tree too often, of course. E.g., my current mxe setup was updated for the
last time some 5 weeks ago. That would save a significant amount of time,
i.e. copying over and stripping all the dependencies, generating the nsis
script and generating the installer or zip file. Not to mention copying over
and installing in Windows.
(Cross-) Building octave can invoke all CPU cores, the rest can only be done
in one thread It is only the former (building Octave) that is needed by
Windows developers, once an mxe installation is in place on the Windows
side.

BTW I just finished an installer for today's (May 25) 3.9.0+-4.1.0+
"snapshots". Any objection to put it up on e.g., my dropbox?
That would allow a broader audience to try out the development versions on
Windows, instead of initially just on Linux (out of reach for many Windows
users) and only later on, after release and when an installer has been made,
on Windows. 
Ideas, opinions?

Philip




--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Multiple-Octave-versions-in-one-MXE-Octave-installer-tp4663841p4664331.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.