----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Carrera" <[email protected]> To: "Chris Marshall" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 3:37 AM Subject: Re: [Perldl] "Stand Alone" PDL distribution?
> This might be a stupid question, why is it so difficult to make a > static distribution? I was hoping it wouldn't be too hard. Assuming you're just wanting to build PDL against static 3rd party libraries (GSL, Plplot, etc.), I don't think it's all that difficult. It's just a matter of making sure that the PDL build process links against static libraries, not shared ones. For Win32 (both x86 and x64), with the latest git version of PDL, I have ppm packages with GSL, GD, Plplot, FFTW2, Proj4 and TriD (OpenGL) support statically built in. Those ppms can be distributed as standalone, though the OpenGL perl module needs to be installed separately for the TriD support. (Astro::FITS::Header, if required, needs also to be installed separately.) These ppm packages (tar.gz) come in at around 8 Mb. There's some tweaking of Makefile.PL's needed. (eg on windows, you can't build PDL::IO::GD against a static gd library unless you specify the -DNONDLL flag .... and then you also have to specifically link in the -lfreetype -ljpeg -lpng -liconv -lz libraries as they aren't automatically linked in with a static build. And, for Plplot, there's a couple of system libraries that need to be specifically linked in for static builds only.) For the little bit of extra stuffing around involved, it sure is nice to not have to distribute the 3rd party libraries as well. And when it comes to diagnosing problems, you don't have to worry about which version of the 3rd party library is being found - you know it's the version against which the PDL distro was built. Cheers, Rob _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
