On Friday, March 29, 2013 12:49:02 PM UTC+1, leif wrote:
>
> Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
> > I've created #14381 to at least separate m4 from autotools stuff.
>
> Separating it certainly makes sense; I'd still keep it optional though.
>
> Of course you need some sufficiently working C compiler to bootstrap GCC
> 4.{6,7}, as GCC depends on GMP/MPIR, and the latter on M4... :-)
>
> But nevertheless, 'sage -i m4' should work right after unpacking the
> Sage source tarball, before anything else is built ('make').
>
> IMHO there should be a "download only" option to sage-spkg, mainly to
> install optional packages needed for building Sage... (Optionally:
>
Wasn't it discussed at some point?
I'll have a quick look.
> Specify [alternate] target directory, let Sage use some
> SAGE_ADDITIONAL_SPKGS_DIR[S].)
>
>
> -leif
>
> P.S.: I still think we should have some lean Sage source tarball, and
> another with all standard foo stuff (iconv, patch, GCC etc.) included,
> at least until we move to another package management / build /
> distribution system.
>
>
> > On Thursday, December 20, 2012 5:27:57 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, October 6, 2012 11:56:06 PM UTC+2, Jeroen Demeyer
> wrote:
> >
> > Since we just got another report of #11391, I would like to
> propose
> > again to add GNU m4 as standard package. The only possible
> > argument
> > against it would be that it makes the Sage source about 1MB
> > larger...
> >
> > On 2012-06-19 14:34, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> > > How do you guys feel about adding a GNU M4 package? MPIR
> > requires M4,
> > > also PPL with its C interface (see #12672) requires a recent
> > version of
> > > M4. This would add about 1.2 MB to the Sage source
> > distribution.
> > I'd be in favour of including M4 as well.
> >
> > Moreover, now it's already distributed in the optional autotools
> > spkg (which is really useful for development).
> >
> > One might argue that all systems nowadays should have a decent m4
> > already, as patch and iconv we ship as well.
> > But it does not seem to be the case that iconv is always decent (at
> > least on some Solaris, not sure about Cygwin today), and must have
> > been for patch (not sure today neither).
> > And are always these packages installed by default?
> >
> > Ideally, from my point of view, I would prefer to have a completely
> > modular Sage and just do "apt-get install sage" but I fear it won't
> > happen soon.
> > The only use case of a quasi selfcontained distrib is that someone
> > without root privileges but a decent gcc and perl installed can
> > build Sage in a user directory and shipping m4 will help that a
> > little more.
>
> --
> () The ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> /\ Help Cure HTML E-Mail
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
