Re: [buildcheapeeg] Question for Jim-P

From: Doug Sutherland (wearable_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 2002-03-01 13:30:16


Hi Jim,

> Perhaps if we really want to release binaries, we need to
> release as packages (.deb, .rpm, or whatever) with
> dependencies against the official SDL and FFTW libraries
> for those distributions.

Based on our failure to make binaries work across
ANY diferent machine, I'd say so, but ...

> Building from source is so much easier.

Totally. I always go straight to the source now. Slack
doesn't really have packaging like deb or redhat. There
is an rpm that runs, but you basically do --nodeps and
-- force and hope for the best.

Considering the audience, the linux people should know
how to build from source. If they don't they should
learn. If we use automake, it will be easy as pie. And
both FFTW and SDL use automake. My vote is to only do
source for linux but source or binaries for windows.

> (See Sorcerer Linux for a rather novel distribution
> based entirely on source downloads

See LinuxFromScratch if you want to start with just gcc
and binutils and build everything. Perhaps this is
similar to sorcerer. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/

> This is probably because I'm using the Debian SDL package.

I am disliking packages and liking full source more
and more each day.

> Just to let you know that I never tried building SDL
> from source on Windows. I just installed the .DLL, and
> fiddled around with the provided .a and header files
> etc until it worked (merging them into the mingw/
> directory tree in the end).

I'm going to try and see what happens. BSOD maybe?

-- Doug



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:39 BST