From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Horst von Brand To: law@cygnus.com Cc: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: egcs-970828: Some nits Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 03:37:00 -0000 Message-id: <199709050339.XAA02007@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl> References: <15578.873405677@hurl.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 1997-09/msg00193.html Jeffrey A Law said: [...] > gcc has been successful with developers because they're willing to go find > all those dependencies and pick up makeinfo, bison, gnu make, etc etc. True. And linux from the shelf below ;-) > For egcs/gcc to take the next step forward we have to do a better job > at packaging -- it literally as to be as simple as unpack, configure, make > make install to get a fully functional toolchain. Hell, it might even > need to be simpler than that :-) Yes. And no. Maybe. There _has_ to be a way of not messing up something else (texinfo is at 2.9 in egcs, I used to have 2.11 :-). To have a toolchain-x.y.z.tar.gz of 200Mb won't go down easy on folks (egcs is nearly 10Mb now, and that is _huge_. What if I don't want make? Or Objective C? Or Pascal, FORTRAN, whatever?). There will be several separate packages, and to upgrade gui-development-x.y to x.y+1 just because a new texinfo came out is ridiculous. The phenomenon of lagging-behind-packages is to be seen today, specially wrt texinfo.tex and some elisp files, and there isn't any easy answer to that... > Thanks for the feedback. Just trying to give a bit back. -- Horst von Brand vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl Casilla 9G, Viqa del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616