Re: Running Octave from Fink?

[Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso]

On 5 November 2012 23:28, Alexander Hansen <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 11/5/12 8:30 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>> On 5 November 2012 17:03, Alexander Hansen <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Having to type "agree" is definitely annoying.
>>
>> Xcode doubly so.
>>
>> Does Fink work without it? I understand Macports doesn't work with a
>> pure gcc install. It's unfortunate to have to recommend people to
>> install non-free software to install Octave.
>>
>> - Jordi G. H.
>>
>
> My understanding is that you can't really get a fully functional build
> system in OS X based solely on those components that Apple puts under
> their APSL.

To hell with Apple and their legalese. Octave and gcc are free
software and you can't restrict them further. I am not talking about
anything Apple is distributing other than the core OS.

> And we pretty much insist on the Xcode compilers except when packages
> need functionality that they don't provide, like a Fortran compiler.  I
> _could_ move our Octave packages over to FSF gcc and g++--I just
> happened to get fewer test failures with Xcode's compilers.  Beyond
> that, I'm not sure what all in the Octave dependency tree won't build
> with FSF GCC.

I am certain that Octave builds with this:

    https://github.com/kennethreitz/osx-gcc-installer

I don't know if the rest of Fink works without Xcode, though. Have you
ever tested?

> The project team's point of view is that since we're on a proprietary OS
> anyway, and since our users don't have to spend cash on Xcode, it
> fulfills our needs.

Which project? GNU's point of view is that we don't recommend people
to install non-free software. That people are already running a
restrictive OS is a problem, but we shouldn't be telling them to agree
to legalese to run Octave. Two wrongs do not make a right.

- Jordi G. H.