Re: GSoC project about binary packaging

[PhilipNienhuis]

Patrick Noffke wrote
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:02 AM, PhilipNienhuis <

> pr.nienhuis@

> > wrote:
>>
>> So the good thing for cross-compiling is that it is a lot faster (>12-14
>> hrs
>> natively vs. a little over 2 hours cross, on the same core-i5 machine,
>> for
>> Octave + all dependencies).
>>
> 
> I'm not sure what impact this has on the choice of installer.  We
> still want to support both native and cross builds, right?

I merely pointed to the fact that NSIS can indeed be built & run (to build a
Windows installer file) while cross-compiling/building, and that currently a
native build isn't yet as smooth as desired.

Native or cross-building: I really doubt if Windows users will care - they
probably expect an installer, I expect few Windows users are going to build
their own Octave.

This question -native or cross- is probably only somewhat relevant for the
few Windows Octave developers. Many of them run Linux as well, if only to
build Octave.

As to the choice of installer (you mean .exe or .msi?) - see my other post.

Philip




--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/GSoC-project-about-binary-packaging-tp4654636p4655177.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.