On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Josh Blum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 01/12/2012 10:53 AM, Ed Criscuolo wrote: >> On 1/11/12 4:59 PM, Josh Blum wrote: >>> I dont think this is a tarball of the source tree. Rather, its a tarball >>> produced by autotools with only files listed by makefile.ams or >>> generated in autotools. >> >> But what of the future? If autotools goes away in favor of cmake, does >> this mean that tarballs will go away too? I hope not, as a tarball is >> the preferred way of installation on a number of the machines that I use >> because they are in isolated labs and are not allowed to be connected >> to the internet. >> > > One suggestion I have, is if we pushed all of the tags onto github, > github will happily give your source tarballs for any particular branch, > or tag, or revision. Example: > > wget https://github.com/gnuradio/gnuradio/tarball/master > wget https://github.com/gnuradio/gnuradio/tarball/<some tag name> >
I will pipe in here with how I handle my interweb-disconnected machines: I have the git repo cloned onto a flash drive, and clone/pull from that on the disconnected machine(s) when needed: a nice feature of a DVCS. This does assume that moving flash drives between machines is allowed. However, since I imagine there are plenty of people who don't really want to go through the additional step of dealing with git (if they're used to building from tarballs), I believe cmake has the ability to create them using the make package_source command, but I admit I've never tried this with GNURadio, and have no idea how well it does/doesn't work. Note that cmake-produced tarballs do require cmake to exist on the machine doing the build (whereas autotools generated tarballs only assume the Bourne shell+required compilers/etc. are available). -- Doug Geiger [email protected] _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
