[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Running Octave from Fink?

From: Alexander Hansen
Subject: Re: Running Octave from Fink?
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 09:09:05 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2

On 11/6/12 6:53 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> On 5 November 2012 23:28, Alexander Hansen <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 11/5/12 8:30 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>>> On 5 November 2012 17:03, Alexander Hansen <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Having to type "agree" is definitely annoying.
>>> Xcode doubly so.
>>> Does Fink work without it? I understand Macports doesn't work with a
>>> pure gcc install. It's unfortunate to have to recommend people to
>>> install non-free software to install Octave.
>>> - Jordi G. H.
>> My understanding is that you can't really get a fully functional build
>> system in OS X based solely on those components that Apple puts under
>> their APSL.
> To hell with Apple and their legalese. Octave and gcc are free
> software and you can't restrict them further. I am not talking about
> anything Apple is distributing other than the core OS.
>> And we pretty much insist on the Xcode compilers except when packages
>> need functionality that they don't provide, like a Fortran compiler.  I
>> _could_ move our Octave packages over to FSF gcc and g++--I just
>> happened to get fewer test failures with Xcode's compilers.  Beyond
>> that, I'm not sure what all in the Octave dependency tree won't build
>> with FSF GCC.
> I am certain that Octave builds with this:
> I don't know if the rest of Fink works without Xcode, though. Have you
> ever tested?

No.  There has been no compelling reason to do so.  Integration with
third-party tools is a very low priority.

>> The project team's point of view is that since we're on a proprietary OS
>> anyway, and since our users don't have to spend cash on Xcode, it
>> fulfills our needs.
> Which project? 

I meant the Fink Project, of course.

GNU's point of view is that we don't recommend people
> to install non-free software. That people are already running a
> restrictive OS is a problem, but we shouldn't be telling them to agree
> to legalese to run Octave. Two wrongs do not make a right.
> - Jordi G. H.

I'm not saying it's "right", I'm saying "It is what it is".

I was told, by someone who knows a great deal about compiling on OS X,
that osx-gcc-installer does _not_ give a _fully_ functional build tool
set for OS X, in that it lacks proprietary headers and the like which
are provided by Xcode.

Fink has to deal with a wide range of package build systems, some of
which _assume_ Xcode provides the OS X compiler set.  In the absence of
dedicated resources where we can provide binaries to users, having users
Xcode is the most effective path for us.
Alexander Hansen, Ph.D.
Fink User Liaison
My package updates:

reply via email to

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