[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: binary packages

From: Per Persson
Subject: Re: binary packages
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:34:39 +0100

On Feb 15, 2004, at 07:14, Paul Kienzle wrote:

Mac OS X 10.2, 10.3:
        Similar to windows, there are presently packages for fink,
        for darwinports and standalone in various states of
        repair. My own preference is again for a standalone
        binary which doesn't depend on much else so that getting
        someone up and running is simply a matter of dropping
        the binary package somewhere in the Applications directory
        and dragging it to the dock.

While I agree that a completely self-contained that could be drag'n drop installed anywhere the user choose would be the ultimate Mac experience, I also think that it would be too much work right now. FWIW, I think such a goal could be achieved in the future, and without any changes to octave itself. (If you're interested I have a screenshot of something I hacked up some time ago (2001?) here and )

So, for now I think that the best option is to provide a standard installer that installs a octave, octave-forge, gnuplot and all other deps. It is also simple to provide an octave "wrapper", a shell script that behaves like an application in that is has a custom icon, may be dragged to the doc, can be installed anywhere etc. (Just append .command to an executable script, and you'll see.)

Such an installer may also provide post-install options to set up paths, editor etc. (I think a lot of people would like to use BBEdit which works really well)
I certainly wouldn't miss the opportunity to add AquaTerm to the mix;-)
(AquaTerm also supports both PGPLOT and PLplot)

I'd be able to help on packaging octave et al as long as we keep it a reasonably long term goal.

Again a lot of work needs to be
        done on sundries to make sure the OS X package can use
        qhull, ginac, fftw, hdf5, etc.

Yes, I'm playing with hdf5 and fftw3 right now.

I don't know if we need separate
        binaries for 10.2 and 10.3.

Most likely not.
Another decision is the level of architecture support we'd want. Simple option is to generate code that runs on all ppc's.

Even if we had to differ between 10.2 and 10.3 and decide to support G4 and G5 extensions, the libs and executables may be created "fat" which, if I understand correctly, means that they can host code for different targets. (Even ix86 if necessary...)

I don't know if veclib is always
        available and sufficient,

Available and sufficient as of 10.2

or if we need to support a variety
        of Atlas-enhanced libraries.


I don't know if there is a standard
        place where the community can post such binaries, or if
        octave-forge is the best place to host them.

There are several link sites, including Apples own third-party listings, that would host info and links to a binary at sourceforge.


Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:
How to fund new projects:
Subscription information:

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]