On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:37 AM, mabshoff <mabsh...@googlemail.com> wrote: > I have the desire to fix the dependency problem. i.e. each spkg should > describe its dependencies and we should then use a little script to > turn that into a dependency makefile. The main problem to do this are > at the moment: > > (a) we need to agree on a standard, i.e. file naming conventions, etc > (b) we need to come up with a central spkg repo, i.e. > spd.sagemath.org ;) > (c) we probably will need the concept of meta-spkg, i.e. Fortran > would be one obvious thing where various possibilities arise. > (d) we also need something like a number of toggles, i.e. FRAMEWORK > build on OSX would be one, so if you wanted Mayavi on OSX the build > system should be smart enough to force a framework build on OSX. > (e) minium and maximum version numbers of spkgs allowed, i.e. in case > you have build issue or bugfixes mandate minimum versions, security > fixes, etc. > > None of the above is particularly hard to do, someone just needs to > find the time to do it. We should very much orient ourselves toward > the Debian build system, but obviously we cannot use it since we want > to be truly cross platform.
Why not use debian tools for this exact purpose? That's precisely what fink does, isn't it? If this is feasible, it would be an excellent way of building a car without inventing the screws. > What this very much goes into is the ability to to custom Sage or SPD > distributions, i.e. you could specify a profile like > > [profile] > require: sage-fe > require: sage-notebook > [end profile] > > and then a little script could spit you out a tarball for your > specific purpose that would have all the dependencies resolved. In > this case it would obviously contain all the bits required to build > the notebook and the packages considered to be part of a not yet > existing finite element set, i.e. some of the stuff Ondrej & friends > are doing. tarballs are gross... especially 200Mb ones... > This would also allow Sage to more or less get rid of most > experimental and optional spkgs and just release them in a pool of spd > maintained packages where hopefully upstream would take care of > maintaining them. Obviously a log of current Sage devs would then keep > taking care of optional and experimental spkgs. Awesome... this looks very much like debian... :-) Best, Gonzalo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
