Do we include gcc in maxima windows distribution?

Hi all.

I think that 1 is the best (if achievable time wise) particularly as that is
the standard set by Maxima 5.5.  If you do 4 then you have already gone the
hard yards.  These days I don't think that size is a major issue.

It is also the approach taken by the Glasgow Haskell compiler, for the
following important reason - it helps eliminate the possiblility of mixups
between incompatible versions of the compiler, linker and libraries as time
goes by.  As an example, in the past couple of days the standard Mingw32
download package changed from 1.1 to 2, and now uses gcc 3.2 which currently
does not work (as far as I know) for GCL.

I am happy to help with this but I am very short of time for the next week
or two so may not be able to do much.

Cheers

Mike Thomas.


From: "James Amundson" <amundson at fnal>
> I think (4) sounds like the best compromise. I don't think (2) by itself
> is acceptable. The windows distribution should really be usable by
> people who don't have a clue about Cygwin/MSYS and mingw.
>
> Of course that easy for me to say -- I'm relying on others to put
> together the Windows binaries. I can just barely get the supporting
> tools for Maxima put together under windows myself.
>
> --Jim
>
>
> On Fri, 2002-09-06 at 17:45, Billinghurst, David (CRTS) wrote:
> > I have been thinking some more on the windows distribution.
> >
> > I am unclear what to do about gcc.  The maxima-5.5 release includes
> > a stripped down gcc in a sub directory.  We can:
> >  1. include a stripped down gcc in out distribution,
> >  2. require that mingw gcc be installed
> >  3. Two distributions - both (1) and (2)
> >  4. One distribution (2), and a seperate minimal gcc
> >     converts (2) to (1)
> >  5. Option (1), with some notes on how to use an installed
> >     gcc.
> >
> > Option (1) the largest, but should be simplest for users.
> > Option (2) is the least work for us and the smallest download.
> > Option (3) is the most flexible, more initial packaging
> > but probably more robust.
> > Options (4) and (5) are compromises.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Maxima mailing list
> > Maxima@www.math.utexas.edu
> > http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima@www.math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>