Op donderdag 20 september 2018 22:21:25 CEST schreef davidcousen...@gmail.com: > On Thu, 2018-09-20 at 11:37 -0500, Adrien Monteleone wrote: > > From the installation page (which includes some RHEL based distro links) I > > see there are breakout pages for FreeBSD and Solaris. (now OpenIndiana) > > Are these still relevant? Should the ‘FreeBSD’ page be re-labeled ‘BSD’? > > The Solaris page looks like it is circa 2007. > > Unless there are really significant differences from distribution to > distribution and I doubt there are really apart from those above.
Don't be mistaken by the similarity in names. The *BSD family has various independent package management systems, which I otherwise have no experience with at all :) But a quick net search revealed netbsd uses pkg_add/pkg_remove and a make based installation system to install directly from source. Freebsd has a "pgk" tool (without the _add,_remove parts) to install binaries and a ports system to install directly from sources. Having said all that I don't expect you to detail all of that. For starters I believe most *BSD users are more accustomed to building from source because it's inherently integrated in their system. So I expect most of them can read linux based build instructions and translate them to their *BSD flavor. In addition if extra instructions are desirable for a given *BSD flavor I would welcome someone more knowledgeable about those platforms to chime in. In the initial version we can restrict ourselves to stating "GnuCash is known to build and run on different *BSD systems, however we currently lack the knowledge to document here how it's done". Well, formulated more nicely. > I think a > list of distributions really belongs in the features type marketing. What do you mean with "features type marketing" ? > In the > Installation page it is a bit more relevant as it lists the distros which > have Gnucash available from their package management cache. This section is > probably more relevant to those that don't and those of us who like to be > at the bleeding edge. > > On that note, perhaps backing up a step to ‘Installation’ might be a good > > idea to make sure everything is tidy. > Good idea ,I'll check out consistency. The Building page is a breakout from > the Installation page. > > Package Formats > > --------------- > > I thought calameres was an installer used to install distros, not a > > packaging format, though I could be misunderstanding it’s scope. (QT > > based DE’s seem to like it) > > It possibly is. I did a search around for different package managers and > dsitribution independent installers. I had the impression it was supposed > to be a distribution independent installer as that was what I was searching > for (flatpak, snap etc)at the time ( ionly read the first paragraph on the > page). They probably belong in the Installation page rather than here > anyway, but maybe some notes for people preparing such packages to include > all compile options and anything which can go in the package setup to make > it work without having to manually bypass the sandboxing of the OS might > help. Calamares is indeed outside of the scope here. As Adrien notes it's a distribution installer, that is the tool you use to install a linux distribution on your PC. It's unique in that it's a collaborative project supported by several - but mostly smaller - distributions. Once the distribution is installed, extra software is installed via the distribution's own package manager. At that point calamares is not relevant any more. David, I have read your initial work on the Build page and I have added some remarks in the discussion part of that page. It thought that more appropriate than here on the mailing list. Regards, Geert _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
