Re: globally installed packages vs. relocatable Octave

[Philip Nienhuis]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 11/07/2014 10:41 AM, Philip Nienhuis wrote:
>
> > Fine examples are the 3.6.x binaries & OF package binaries supplied by
> > Nitzan. After unzipping the preinstalled packages into OCTAVE_HOME, "pkg
> > rebuild" would just suffice (Nitzan mentioned more options but that
> > was only
> > because OF package dependencies could also require a specific load order;
> > e.g., first the java pkg, only then the io pkg).
>
> I'd really like to avoid the pkg rebuild step.

Yes it is a bit messy.
"pkg rebuild" does a lot of things under the hood; I suppose we just 
need (to adapt) those parts that update the various paths.
BTW I'm no fan of absolute paths either.

>   And the need for having
> a batch file to start Octave so that PATH and other settings are
> correct.  But maybe this is just not possible?  I don't know.

On Windows I wouldn't consider a batch file a very alien thing. It looks 
rough but it is a very effective mechanism to set up the environment a 
program will be running in. Benjamin Lindner also used them, a.o., to 
set up the terminal, in the 3.2.x binaries.
But if Octave can put its own libdir first in the PATH (at least on 
Wndows) a lot of problems can be avoided (not only the mkoctfile 
issues); that was my primary motive for a batch file.
Other environment settings (like for specific OF packages, or local 
dependencies) can be set by setenv() once Octave itself is "up", but 
that must happen before those OF packages etc. are being loaded. Maybe 
they can be read from .octaverc and processed in time? Or maybe the pkg 
command should take care of it, on a per-OF-package basis? (IIRC the 
PKG_ADD files have some issues during OF package loading as regards 
exact timing of loading the .m file and .octfile subdirs)

>  Also, I'd
> eventually like to be able to cross compile packages for Windows systems
> and install the resulting files in the zip file (or installer) and not
> have absolute directory names corresponding to the build system show up
> anywhere in the packages.

.... or in octave_config_info?

>  That goal also applies to Octave itself.  I
> think we have some work to do to make it a reality.

Philip