[M3devel] Providing some current CM3 bootstrap archives, was: Re: m3cg build failure on powerpc

[Olaf Wagner]

Quoting Jay <jayk123 at hotmail.com>:

> 64 bit integer support will have to wait.
As long as the binary does compile the current code base, it will be OK,
I think.

> I assume we are in a "release push" here?
No, this is not really a release, I just had the impression that
some current snapshots were required.

> I COULD if really necessary do about any x86 Linux (maybe x86   
> Solaris, don't think it is supported) or PowerPC Linux or PowerPC   
> Darwin..in a virtual machine if nothing else..

I think PowerPC Linux would be great, if you find the time. I don't
know of many people who could build that.

>> for Linux (perhaps multiple distros, too, there?)
> Oh for just a bit of compatibility... :)
I've done a build on Debian now.

> Oh btw, anyone want to make an executive decision on a minor detail?
>   .zip or .tar.gz or .tar.bz2 or self expanding .zip in an .exe?
>   make-dist.cmd is setup to make any of these.
>   I don't know how to make a self expanding .tar.gz or   
> .tar.bz2...though should be easy, perhaps not with the following   
> feature:
>   The .exes can either be run, or can be used as direct input to   
> unzip, or renamed to .zip and probably opened with Windows Explorer.
>   It's pretty neat.
>    .tar.bz2 is always the smallest in my experience and that's what   
> I left make-dist.cmd doing.
>    .tar.gz is usually in the middle.
>   .zip usually largest, though more efficient for extracting less   
> than the whole archive -- the files are compressed individually   
> instead of compressing the entire stream at once.
>    Self expanding .zip adds a small fixed constant prefix.

I'm fine with any of these. Since Windows does seem to use other
approaches and conventions in most aspects anyway, we should just
go with what is easiest for beginners. What would you suggest?
Self-extracting .exe?

> I wonder if cminstall can be "better" on Unix, comparable to it   
> being gone on Windows, but I don't care.
No, it's not really better on Unix, but it's better than nothing
for many, and it takes efforts to change or improve it (including all
documentation), which nobody seems interested to invest.

> You know, either make it unnecessary or make it totally automatic. I  
>  know it tries to figure out the defaults. I don't know how correct   
> it tends to be.
Making such things completely automatic on many different target platform
always ends in unmanageable efforts for small teams in my experience.
CM3 has no resources for this I'm afraid.

> Oh and then a really obvious obnoxious question is if we should be   
> building .debs, .rpms, Mac .pkg/.img/.dmg etc..
This again is the question who wants to maintain all that stuff.
IMO it's OK if we have special support contributed for this or that
target, but nobody ever showed real interest in maintaining such
support through several release cycles.

> Personally I don't mind the lowest tech current approach. Slackware   
> anyone? :) (I used it in the Linux kernel 1.x time, which is when   
> most of my Linux use ever was..)
I tend to agree that low-tech in the installation area may be
appropriate for CM3 ;-)

Olaf
-- 
Olaf Wagner -- elego Software Solutions GmbH
                Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25 / Gebäude 12, 13355 Berlin, Germany
phone: +49 30 23 45 86 96  mobile: +49 177 2345 869  fax: +49 30 23 45 86 95
    http://www.elegosoft.com | Geschäftsführer: Olaf Wagner | Sitz: Berlin
Handelregister: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 77719 | USt-IdNr: DE163214194