On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Szak�ts Viktor wrote:
Hi Viktor,
> Macports is one (Linux-like) 3rd party solution. [ I try to
> not use it, as it adds up a difficult to replicate component
> to an otherwise clean system. You need to do sudo/admin, which
> I also try to avoid. ]
Before you will change sth with deafult directory location I think
that you should think about incoming user questions. Probably it
will be good to start sth like MacOSX-FAQ. I've got the 1-st question:
1. Why I cannot execute this simple scrpit in MacOSX port:
#!/usr/bin/hbrun
proc main()
alert( "Hello World!!!" )
return
I have big internet shop application which with hundreds
CGI harbour scripts and it does not work with MacOSX.
> Also, I have an OSX port of my apps running/building fine
> without any need to install stuff in /opt /usr or any other
> such non-user locations, or setup envvar or do any global
> configuration whatsoever. So the issue is really only hbrun,
> hbtest and hbmk behavior. [ None of these is needed for my
> project. ]
The fact that you are using Harbour in very limited way like
in Windows it does not mean that you have rights to force
such usage also for other users.
>> I know we don't agree here but I still think that creating binary
>> distributions of a multi platform, multi architecture open source
>> compiler are a waste of time.
>> I understand that an OpenOffice user don't want to know how to build
>> it but the knowledge required to build Harbour is the same necessary
>> to use it.
> That's true, but if we provide binaries, I'm not sure there
> is a point to limit its usage by using it as a showcase or
> to target some other academic goals, or try to replicate
> customs from other systems.
I do not agree. You both are thinking only about your current needs.
I want to be able to write Harbour applications as scripts or
binaries and distribute them in system friendly packages like
RPM or DEB. It means that I need Harbour installed in known
for OS and package manager way so dependencies will be check
automatically and if necessary user can download also Harbour
shared libraries or whole compiler and install them in his
system. F.e. I can write new bittorent client as Harbour
application. We do not have to build binaries but we have to
create system where such binaries are easy to create.
If you think that whole Harbour future should be reduced to
port your own Clipper applications to different OS-es then we
do not need it at all. Most of core developers have sufficient
knowledge to make their own customized Harbour builds and adopt
his source to them. If you want to see somewhere Harbour as
popular language used to write different type of applications
then we _MUST_ create support for OS friendly installation
which will keep some basic rules between platforms or we
will have serious problems with portability.
MacOSX native installer is IMHO a must. Just like we should have
BSD ports. There is a big place for Harbour users to help us in
making Harbour more popular so it will be added to official distributions.
And here I really want to ask all Harbour MacOSX users to participate
in this job to create it. Sorry but here I cannot help. I do not even
know what MacOSX uses as package manager, what is the official location
policy, how it supports dependencies, etc.
>> Shared library are simply a MUST. I moved Mac OSX status to "fully
>> supported development platform" in my company only last week after I
>> got them working.
> No one said otherwise. The question is: why we want to push
> this for hbrun, hbtest and hbmk default.
hbtest is not final user application and it's not necessary to
distribute it. hbrun is final user application and it has to be
synced with harbour shared library installed in given OS.
The easiest way is linking it with this library.
It also needs strict location so it cannot be moved to any other
place in official releases just like Harbour shared library so
I do not see what you want to win by forcing static linking.
You will only create bigger binaries.
> So far none could say a single argument why -shared
> is useful for the above three. (in OS X)
Just like you are presenting only your limited by Windows point
of view without any other argument then I want to make it in
such way because I like it, I used to do it in Windows and
it's enough for me personally.
Viktor, do it what you only want with MacOSX builds.
I wish you great success.
I do not use MacOSX so it's not a problem for me. When I will
have to use it then for my own personal use I'll create custom
Harbour builds compatible with other environments quite fast.
The only one problem I can see is that I will have to distribute
alternative harbour shared library and hbrun for MacOSX what
can be problem for final users but for sure I'll start with
creating native packages for Harbour installation to reduce it.
best regards,
Przemek
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
