Michal Rudolf schrieb:
Hi!
>> This requires a binary distribution outside the packaging system of the
>> target platforms in question. Also I want to mention that for binary
>> distributions target platforms need to be defined. Linux only? Mac?
>> FreeBSD? Others?
> Wasn't Scid compiled separately for Mac or FreeBSD?
Till now I only know of a Windows binary. (Well you don't
have to distribute a Windows software as source, it's waste
of time, as nobody can compile it.)
> If yes, we can just provided some more libraries. If not,
> user is anyway expected to be able to compile Scid itself
That is my point: on almose _any_ platform except DOS you
have to compile scid yourself as long as you want to use our
extended version. (Till now our extended version did not make
it in any major distribution, at least I don't know of any.
Debian was on the way, Mac binaries are in the making).
Now, just a recent quote from the list here:
"I experience mixed emotions whenever Pascal announces
that a new version is available. Scid is fantastic and
Pascal's new features make it even better. However, I am
not unix- savvy (major understatement), so the build
process is a major headache for me.
[...]
For me, the configuration system is workable, but I would
appreciate Mac-friendly improvements. Even a bash script
or getting the latest version available on fink would
make my life with scid immensely better."
> - and we just need to tell him to install newer version of
> Tcl too.
Ok... But the above describes my concerns pretty well. And
Cory at least tries hard to get it done. And he's a lucky
one as for his Mac he has very good chances to get a
prebuild binary some day ;)
> While I understand your concerns as proposed solution
> isn't elegant, I don't think most users care.
I'm pretty sure they don't. My concern is wether they will
care about the README that states "fetch a 8.5 version of
Tcl/Tk for your platform, set up the proper environment
before you build."
> They much prefer nicer, easier to use GUI than perfectly
> clean installation.
Well my observation is, that almost nobody cares about a
clean installation these days. Those are the guys that
always complain that nothing is working ;) Ok, I worked to
long as sysadmin...
Don't get me wrong: if you really want to go to 8.5 now,
I'll not hinder that. How could I anyway. I've expressed my
concerns and it should be enough now. I'd like to see a
3.6.24 GA before 8.5 is required though. Probably Pascal
could set up an RC these days?
And I'm not sure wether I'll be able to contribute much
code in 8.5. My current "reference work" on Tcl/Tk is dated
1999, admitting that I'd indeed have access to a 2001
edition (though I fear that wouldn't make things much
better). At home I've no real network connection to use the
www.
Finally, I'm one of those that prefer a clean installation
on a rock solid platform ;) You might remember that I was
actually never really able to build ChessX simply cause that
project decided to use Qt at the very bleeding edge. There
even the blood didn't start to dry on that edge. (Hence I
was about 3 or more releases behind the build requirements
all the time...)
I'll check out the ActiveState-Package Pascal mentioned
these days. Maybe I could get something decent set up with
them. But that'll have to wait till next week.
--
Kind regards,
Alexander Wagner
Universitaetsbibliothek Ilmenau
Langewiesener Str. 37
98693 Ilmenau
Tel.: 03677/69-4521 , Fax.: 03677/69-4617
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Scid-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
