Re: 1.4.7 building on cygwin

[Gerrit P. Haase]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen schrieb am 2001-09-22, 18:17:

>"Gerrit P. Haase" <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I don't like that part of the lily-build (install) on cygwin.
>> /bin/sh ../.././stepmake/stepmake/../bin/install-sh -c -d /etc/postinstall
>> /bin/sh ../.././stepmake/stepmake/../bin/install-sh -c -m 644 
>> ./out/post-gs.sh /etc/postinstall/ 
>
>If you want, please fix it.  The only reason for this is that it
>is fully automatic (this is really, really important, windows users
>keep telling me), and seemed to work now.

O.k.

>The main reason for lots of things in the windows install/version is
>that we've not yet had a developer that likes to spend time in
>windows.  So far, we've mainly had users with varying bug reporting
>qualities.
>
>> Is it really neccessary to do this as postinstall/profile.d scripts?
>> The usual way on cygwin is to add a config script to the dists like iu-config
>> for the inetutils script.
>> After installing the binary it is needed to run that script.
>
>By the user?  That would be no good.

Come on, musicians who will use it are quite clever people and 
they will be able to run a script.  On the other hand, it is o.k.
but only if I install a binary. After building, now there are these 
scripts which gets never executed if i don't run setup...

>Cutting down on the scripts could be ok, but I wanted to keep
>functionality for each package in a separate script, so that it would
>be real easy to ask a user to change that script, or to drop it when a
>package gets replaced by its cygwin version.

Not every user wants to use miktex, if i have cygwin installed with tetex, 
i want to use it, so there should be the option to choose. Or there needs 
to be a much more complex script.

>> with lilypond like python 1.5.
>
>Afaik, we're recommending and distributing cygwin's python2.x now.  If
>we can junk some python scripts, that would be good.  I haven't looked
>at that after the move to cygwin's 2.x

That is not important, python is python.

>> Cygwin comes with ghostscript (it is in standard PATHs included)
>
>When it works all right, we should go with that.  Ideally, I'd like to
>have lilypond included in cygwin, or have a separate partial cygwin
>mirror that only adds lilypond, no native windows packages or other
>stuff that's not in cygwin.  BUT, everything should `just work'...

At this time, there will be no new packages accepted until new setup.exe
is out. There is a bug, I will try to debug it this weekend, but I don't
know if I'm able to fix it.  But once the new setup is working, it will
be no problem to include your package in cygwin's netrelease.
But then it should fit better in the standard cygwin setup.
There will be an option (I hope so) to define user-defined-setups, that means
the minimal cygwin plus the packages you need (to run s.th. other) could be
defined and it gets cached for the user, so he is only asked by setup to
install s.th. if s.th. new for this definition is available.

>> It is tetex not miktex included  (tetex is in the standard PATH settings 
>> and if one makes use of it, it is set up correct).
>
>The same here.  Last time I looked, the included tetex was far from
>complete.  It needed user intervention to set-up some symlinks and
>stuff.  Another point for miktex is that it works, and it includes
>yap, a nice dvi viewer.  That's really useful.

Sure, it won't work if you have no fonts (33MB), it won't work if you
don't run the config-scripts, but also these scripts aren't run automatically.
And I think, only because someone is using windows, he is not an idiot, 
he should be able to run some scripts.
A computer is like a car, you need to know how to drive it, else 
it drives you. And also windows is far away from doing everything for the user.
There is no 'Setup and run'. You always need to figure out how s.th. is 
working.

>> I would like it more if the paths were compiled in the executables,
>> there should be no problem to setup things for the 'standard' cygwin paths.
>
>What do you mean, exactly; what executables?  The only tools that we
>compile are lilypond and guile; the others were tarred-up windows-
>installshield-installs.

Well everything what is needed for lilypond should be in standard paths.
Python + tetex + gs are in /usr/bin, guile should be there, too, but it is 
in /usr/local/bin which is also in the standard cygwin path.
What is missing?

>> Is there a site in wiki or where is in the docu the description where
>> all needed environment settings are described?
>
>Yes, but its still rather empty:
>
>    http://lilypond.org/wiki/?WindowsEnvironmentSettings

Hmmm, and where are the environment settings for linux/unix are described?
There is no difference between cygwin & linux (in that point).

>there are pages about virtually anything in our wiki
>:-)

Yep:)

Gerrit


-- 
=^..^=