Am Dienstag, den 20.10.2020, 18:26 +0200 schrieb David Kastrup: > Jonas Hahnfeld <[email protected]> writes: > > > I don't want to digress into this topic right now (P.S. the reply got > > longer than I initially anticipated), but the scripts have a much > > narrower focus: they mostly compile native binaries (except for > > Windows via mingw) instead of cross-compiling for all targets. In my > > experience from helping with GUB in the past year, that's the main > > source of complexity for usage and maintenance. Moreover, this choice > > also outright prevents 64-bit executables for macOS because of Apple's > > restrictions with regard to their toolchain. > > > > I'm open to reconsider the choice of sh-scripts, but GUB aims at doing > > just too much (a package manager for building arbitrary packages for > > various targets; where we only do LilyPond to a handful) by using a > > too powerful language and architecture (Python 2 with dynamic > > dependency resolution and generic interfaces to various build > > systems). I think we should learn from that and choose a design that > > avoids the pitfalls. > > To be fair, GUB could have become a significant part of the GNU compiler > toolchain which would have vindicated its complexity, and at one point > of time it was more or less intended for that. > > I have not pushed it in that direction since I never was able to get > dependable information about the legal status of our MacOSX port's > toolkit. While it was clear that the conditions of the 64bit toolkit > precluded its use, the respective conditions for the 32bit kit we used > just were no longer to be found and it was not overly clear just what > version was involved here. If this would have been replaced by some > OpenDarwin components (but we had nobody to work on that, partly a > hen-and-egg problem), this might have been different. > > And with the basic "let's not look too closely here" status of the > MacOSX toolkit, extending its reach would have been asking others to > embrace the potential trouble that we were in ourselves.
For my own reading pleasure, do you have links where this was discussed? I mean, I don't see your name in the GUB repo so I'm not sure what "I have not pushed it" means.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
