Re: Building on MinGW using MXE-built dependencies [WAS: Re: mxe-installer try 2]

[PhilipNienhuis]

John W. Eaton wrote
> On 05/26/2013 03:32 PM, Philip Nienhuis wrote:
> 
>> The (my) aim is to get as far as ./run-octave, and to be able to build
>> and run with --debug-enabled. Once MinGW Octave is sufficiently stable,
>> I believe the archive (or installer) made with MXE on Linux is still the
>> superior option.
> 
> I'm working on some changes that should make it possible to use the
> mxe-octave build environment as a native or cross-compile system.
> 
> I've focused first on trying to make it work for my Debian system, but
> my next step is to try a native build on a Windows system with a
> minimal MinGW system installed.
> 
> I'm close to being able to do the following on a Debian system that
> starts out with no development tools:
> 
>    * install the base system (no development tools)
> 
>    * install a minimal set of development tools using apt:
> 
>        bash, bzip2, gcc, g++, gfortran, make, patch, perl, sed, wget,
>        unzip, ghostscript, unzip, libx11-dev, libxext-dev,
>        libgl1-mesa-dev, glu, mercurial
> 
>    * clone mxe-octave archive
> 
>    * make octave JOBS=N

Could you also have a look at why mxe builds break when configure options in
octave.mk are adapted, please?  That occurs not only when trying to build
with Java but also with just llvm. 
I think that it should at least be possible to also build with JIT,
regardless of its current stability and state - after all it seems to build
and work properly on Linux.
If you deem llvm not worthwile presently I'd wonder why llvm is built at all
in mxe-octave (especially because llvm takes about 10-15 % of total build
time).


> Obviously, this doesn't make much sense on a current Debian system,
> but it might on a RHEL 5 system that doesn't have up to date tools.
> Or, on a system that has some up to date tools, you could install most
> depdencies using the system's package management tool, then install
> the rest using mxe-octave.  However, I have no plans to try to
> automate that task.  I'm not trying to take over the job of
> packaging Octave on systems like Debian and Fedora that already have
> good packages for Octave.

Fair enough. Once again thank you for making mxe-octave; it has removed an
enormous stumbling block for building on Windows systems.


> I just want to have a reasonable way to
> automate the task of building Octave and all the dependencies on
> systems that do not have good package systems.

Just for clarity: I am not aiming to be able to completely build on
MinGW/Windows (although once Octave builds there the next steps are pretty
straightforward). 
My MXE/MinGW attempts were primarily meant to make debugging easier and more
time efficient. 
I like the standardized dependencies and add-ons that mxe-octave makes
possible.

Philip




--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Building-on-MinGW-using-MXE-built-dependencies-WAS-Re-mxe-installer-try-2-tp4653330p4653375.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.