[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy)
From: |
Joe Koski |
Subject: |
Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy) |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Sep 2004 11:59:53 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Microsoft-Entourage/11.0.0.040405 |
on 9/17/04 11:16 AM, Jonathan Stickel at address@hidden wrote:
> Open source is a lot about choice, but there is a price to pay for that.
> With Octave there are many choices: which blas/atlas package to use,
> hdf5 support, whether to install octave-forge, and others I don't know.
> With octave-forge there are more choices: GiNaC support, Qhull
> support, additional plotting packages, and others.
>
> To truly choose for yourself, you must compile from source. If you
> don't want to compile from source, you are at the mercy of those who
> will compile for you! Usually binary packages come with less rather
> than more since the more you include, the more library dependencies must
> be solved.
>
As an "average" Unix user, I would prefer to compile from source. I have yet
to compile a package from source where the dependencies were not a problem.
This is a general problem with many GPL programs. On the Mac we are
attempting to use make files developed on Linux boxes, and often end up
patching them before they will work. This is not the best environment for
the "average" Unix user who wants to do calculations, not spend an afternoon
or two twiddling with make files.
On the Mac, Fink attempts to be the replacement for Mandrake, Debian, etc.
type distributions. Usually the version that you want is on the "unstable"
branch of Fink, so you must build it from source, anyway. Plus Fink has
rules about placing files in the /sw directory in order to avoid conflicts
with the OS, which in the process creates complexity. Doing a separate
octave-forge installation also increases complexity. The Fink binary stuff
is usually out-of-date, so it's like getting a current Mandrake CD and
finding that octave 2.1.53 is the latest available.
I guess where this rant is leading is that octave distribution is a
significant problem without an apparent easy solution. For those who are
fully Unix literate and use the latest CVS, this is not a problem. (I'm sure
that there are other problems, such as being the first to find the latest
bug.) For us "average" users, we really need a better way to access the
latest "standard" octave and octave-forge releases. I would like to have
octave 2.1.58 and associated octave-forge, but dread the effort necessary to
make it operational.
Another 2 cents worth.
Joe
> Just my 2 cents. BTW: this is why I use Gentoo for my Linux Distro.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Jonathan C. Webster wrote:
>>
>>
>> Quentin Spencer wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps we need a little "octave-forge advocacy"? One problem I see
>>> is the RPM-based Linux distributions generally include octave but not
>>> octave-forge (Debian users don't have this problem thanks to Dirk). It
>>> would be nice to get octave-forge included in more distributions.
>>>
>>> --Quentin
>>>
>>
>> Second that!
>> Jonathan Webster
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
>>
>> Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org
>> How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html
>> Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
>
> Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org
> How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html
> Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------
- Re: Octave advocacy, (continued)
- Re: Octave advocacy, Quentin Spencer, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave advocacy, NZG, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave advocacy, Jonathan C. Webster, 2004/09/17
- Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy), Jonathan Stickel, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy),
Joe Koski <=
- Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy), Mike Miller, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy), Dirk Eddelbuettel, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy), Paul Kienzle, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave distribution, Jonathan Stickel, 2004/09/18
- Re: Octave distribution, Paul Kienzle, 2004/09/18
- Re: Octave distribution (was: Re: Octave advocacy), Stefan van der Walt, 2004/09/22
- Re: Octave advocacy, Keith Goodman, 2004/09/17
- Re: Octave advocacy, Javier Arántegui, 2004/09/20