[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Axiom-developer] AxiomBinaries

From: Page, Bill
Subject: RE: [Axiom-developer] AxiomBinaries
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:42:16 -0500


> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> address@hidden
.org [mailto:axiom-developer-bounces+bill.page1>
address@hidden On Behalf Of Alfredo Portes
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 12:02 PM
> To: Waldek Hebisch
> Cc: axiom-dev
> Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] AxiomBinaries
> Thanks for the comments.
> > Some comments:
> >
> > 1) The table looks really bad in Lynx (all tables look bad in Lynx,
> > but this one is worse then average).

If you must use Lynx, then you should probably be reading the
source format of the wiki pages rather than the rendered form.

But I think it is unrealistic to design a web site to support
a text-only browser.

> :-) . I need input from Bill, maybe is the DHTML.

No, I am sure that Lynx would just ignore the javascript, but there
is nothing like that in these tables. The reStructuredText source
format of the tables is rendered as common HTML.
> > 2) The page seen to equate "Linux" with "i386 Linux".  I think we
> > should make clear an which architecture given tarball 
> > works. Significant
> > fraction of Linux users are on 64-bit systems and may prefer 64-bit
> > binaries.
> I forgot to add this, maybe because I did not see 64bit 
> binaries in the old page, but I will make the distinction.

You need to think carefully about how to layout the information.
I would suggest replacing the Gold and Silver heading with a
hardware heading. Then put the Gold and Silver versions in two
separate tables. But maybe we are being a little two ambitious?
Who is going to generate all of these binaries and from what
version of the source? How will they be kept reasonably current?

> > Also, it seems that Debian (and only Debian) has binaries for
> > architectures different than i386 and amd64, but the page
> > completly missess such information.

I know people have built Axiom on both IA64 and amd64 (x86)
platforms. We were hoping that many some of them might contribute
a binary tarball for inclusion on the web site. So far, as far
as I know only Tim and I have actually uploaded binaries.
> Do you mean by using apt-get?

Debian has a large compile farm which can be configured to
automatically post new binary versions from updated sources.

There of course (or soon will be) also versions of Axiom for
Solaris/sparc and OSX/PPC.

> > 3) The page mention setting multiple enviroment variables.  
> >    IMHO such settings should be part of wrapper script
> >    (automatically updated at installation time).  Of course,
> >    this is really fault of given tarball...
> Would this be corrected when the new build procedure is done?

All of the binaries available now (except for Debian) have been
created by an adhoc manual process.

In a separate thread Waldek mentioned the need for a

 # make dist

script that would automatically build a complete Axiom distribution
with proper wrapper scripts and possibly also automatic installation
programs (such as the one included now with the Axiom on Windows
binary distribution.

Bill Page.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]