|
From: | Anirudha Bose |
Subject: | Re: GSoC Enquiry: Improving binary packaging |
Date: | Sat, 8 Jun 2013 18:30:18 +0530 |
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:23 PM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
What are the plans for this project? I'd like to see us converge on one build system rather than duplicating effort (again).
I know I am guilty of duplicating previous work when I was trying to get Octave to build with a MinGW cross compiler because I didn't really look at what Michael and others had done in the past for building Octave on Windows, but I'd like to see us avoid further duplication of effort.
I agree that there should be a single build system for "exotic" platforms. And I see this project as a way to merge the existing efforts and converge towards a single system. The project description is on google-melange, but basically there are 2 items on the table: MXE and GUB. The goal is to select one and make it produce binaries for as many platforms as possible.For MXE, what you've done so far is a good starting point. I understand it's able to cross-compile to Windows from Linux, but also native-compile under Linux and MinGW(?). Anirudha, in your project description, you're stating that MXE cannot be used for OS X. Why is it so? Couldn't jwe's version of MXE be re-used to cross-/native-compile octave?
Concerning GUB, I don't know it, so I can't tell. But if jwe's MXE can be used, that would be my first choice, in order to leverage all the work that's already been done.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |