Re: Mac OS Binary

[edmund ronald]

If a local portfile is sufficient why not just put it up on the Octave site?  It makes as much sense we maintain it as that they maintain it ...

BTW has anyone done numerical comparisons of the output of the various Mac versions - my VM thing, MacPorts, Brew? It would be nice to know how the use of different runtimes and compiler optimisations impacts Octave output. 

Edmund

ᐧ

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Sebastian Schöps <address@hidden> wrote:

Marius Schamschula-5 wrote
> See https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48622
>
> I’m not the MacPorts octave maintainer, but I’ve been using octave 4.0.0
> built using a local Portfile MacPorts on all my machines for the last
> three months.

Dear Marius,

does it build on 10.10? If it is more reliable than homebrew we could use
Macports for creating the binary (as Carlo did with 3.x). I am still
struggling with qt on 10.10.

Sebastian

P.S.: Personally, I gave up Macports some years ago when I uploaded an
improved portfile for octave 3.8 (?) and the maintainer asked me for
sponsorship to get the file (quicker?!) integrated into Macports. The
contact was nice but nonetheless I made some experiments with homebrew and I
kept using it :) It seemed more democratic and quicker with updates.



--
View this message in context: http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Mac-OS-Binary-tp4673521p4673571.html

Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.