Re: tarball builds

[Stefan Monnier]

>> I have the impression that nowadays it is at least as common to build
>> from Git as it is to build from the tarball.  And building from the
>> tarball will usually involve installing stuff anyway.
>> E.g. to build Emacs from the tarball in a "typical" GNU/Linux install,
>> a common recommendation is to do something like:
>>
>> apt-get build-deps emacs24
>>
>> in which case, adding texinfo as a requirement is no big deal.
>>
>> I have the impression that the same holds for Mac OS X and for Windows
>> (tho the tools involved are similar) where users also already have to
>> install a bunch of dependencies and "one more or one less" doesn't make
>> much difference because those dependencies are provided by a packaging
>> tool (Macport's, Mingw's, you name it).
> It's not "one more or one less", it would require Autoconf and
> Automake as well, at least.

It's not "one", indeed, but the idea stands: a single "apt-get
build-deps" will bring them all in, whether they're 5 packages or 100.

> It will also make the build much longer: the release tarball currently
> builds in about 30 sec, whereas a full bootstrap takes 20 times that.

That's true.  My impression is that it wouldn't matter, but that's just
a gut feeling backed by no evidence at all.


        Stefan