Le Thu, 7 Nov 2013 15:01:23 +0100, Gubinelli Massimiliano <m.gubine...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> François, could you explain us the reason? I do not know the system. > Do you think that with some aid we can make it? In my opinion, binary packages are quite easy to build (individually), but rather difficult to provide due to the number of cases to consider. If you intend to dynamically link TeXmacs, you will have to build and maintain about one build environment by version and by OS on which you want to consider. So, if you want to consider "only" to distribute binaries to Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, Arch Linux, Mandriva, Mint, Slackware, and if for each you have about two flavour (think e.g. stable and testing releases which will have different Qt environment), you have no less than 12 build env to maintain. Also, afaik, Denis is currently working on static build. If moreover, you consider to build "idiomatic" packages (.deb, .rpm, etc.), you will have to provide some extra work, about dependencies, unbundling, etc. That's why, in an older email, I said we should develop Texmacs and make it well. We should not focus on making a GNU/Linux distribution. It is not really the same work. François -- François Poulain <fpoul...@metrodore.fr> _______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list Texmacs-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
