On 2013-03-17, Rupert Swarbrick <rswarbrick at gmail.com> wrote:
> (1) The status quo. Use checked-in copies of automatically generated
> files. These may or may not be in date. Those that are used less
> often (eg ones for Windows users or proprietary lisps) might be
> massively out of date.
>
> (2) Tell anyone wishing to compile Maxima that they must run "make" at
> least once in the source tree. This will sort out all of those
> pesky automatic files for them and then they can go back to the
> Lisp world from then on.
>
> (3) Try to support a couple of configurations with no Makefile. That
> is, when we roll a tarball we make sure to build all the files that
> are needed for compilation with GCL, say. This wouldn't be a
> ridiculous workload / expense for the release manager, but it could
> support some Make-less users.
I think I'm in favor of #2. It builds stuff correctly, at the expense of
requiring Make on any build system. We may get some flames for that. I'm
willing to accept that.
However, I wonder if Make is currently among the requirements for
building on Windows. If so, all is well. Otherwise, is it a problem to
install a suitable Make? Can any Make for Windows run the Maxima
Makefile without modification?
best
Robert Dodier