Re: Problem installing packages

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 29 May 2012 13:30, c. <address@hidden> wrote:
> why shouldn't we be suggesting to use "pkg install" on OSX then?

No, we should, until something better comes along. pkg install is
likely to work on MacOS 10. A binary distribution will work better,
when it happens.

> I am afraid on OSX things will work slightly differently:
>
> - to be able to build a .dmg you must be experienced enough with
>   Unix tools to build Octave and its dependencies from scratch

> - If you are xperienced enough with Unix tools to build Octave and
>   its dependencies from scratch you most likely don't need / don't
>   like to use a .dmg installer :)

That situation really no different than Ubuntu, Debian, openSUSE...
those who want to build, build. Then they don't care about binary
packages. I am one of those. I have stopped using Debian packages
except to test them, but I still recognise most people want binary
packages.

> that's probably why we currently have a few Octave/OF developers
> that are also OSX users but none of them (us) feels motivated enough
> to invest time on the binary installer ...

Yeah, if you're doing a binary installer, the reason usually is that
you care about something else, e.g. giving it to everyone at your
company/university/support-group and you think your buddies will find
a .dmg easier to use than the source package managers. And since
you've created a .dmg that works for your group of friends, why not
make it available to everyone else?

> That said, I agree that having a .dmg with Octave.app as those that
> Thomas and Julienne provided in the past would be great PR for
> Octave in the OSX user community, so if anyone is willing to take up
> this task I will offer support and testing as I have done in the
> past.

Maybe you could do it? I would actually do it myself if I had access
to an Apple machine. If you can give me that access, I can give it a
shot.

- Jordi G. H.