Re: [Pkg-octave-devel] mkoctfile not installed in Wheezy

[Ben Abbott]

On Dec 1, 2012, at 10:18 AM, c. wrote:

> On 1 Dec 2012, at 16:07, Ben Abbott wrote:
> 
>> My understanding is that if files need to be compiled, then it is a dev 
>> thing.  Because include files and development tools are required?
> So, do you think only packages that are m-files only should be installed via 
> pkg.m?

No.  Just that package managers often treat mkoctfile as a developer's tool.  I 
don't think that implies we should necessarily treat pkg.m in the same manner.

> And maybe oct files should be distributed as binaries rather than source?

This is what many of the Linux package managers do, correct?  This is also done 
for Windows, correct?

> That is indeed a possibilty, though I am afraid it would take quite a bit of 
> work ...
> c.
> 
> P.S. If the discussion proceeds along these lines I think we should move it 
> to the maintainers list


I've been wondering if pkg.m should attempt to setup the build environment to 
reflect that used to build Octave.  Can the contents of octave_config_info() be 
parsed to do that?

Ben