[gccsdk] Shared library status update

Adam lists at snowstone.org.uk
Sat Jan 26 05:13:37 PST 2008

In message <479A34E1.50607 at chocky.org>, Peter Naulls wrote:

> alan buckley wrote:
> >> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:06:51 -0800 Peter Naulls wrote:
> >>
> > > Can we please sum up in a series of bullet points exactly how it's
> > > going to work? I admit I haven't followed this awfully closely,
> > > but I suspect even for those who have but aren't overly familiar
> > > with the subject, it might not be obvious. I'm after some details,
> > > but don't get too carried away.
> >>
> > 
> > This is what I'm proposing, but I'm don't know if it's agreed upon.
> > 
> > >From a users perspective.
> > 
> > 1. Download a new application !SharedMan.

> > [snip]

Something else which occurred to me:

> > 3. I'm not sure where !SharedLib should
> > go. Is it !Boot.Resources or is it somewhere
> > in the System directory.

Does SharedMan need to be separate to SharedLib?

> [snip lots of steps]
> To be honest, I really don't like this.

It's a shame you couldn't contribute earlier on :(

> It's the antithesis of what packaging and automated installing is all
> about.   Yes, for development purposes and occasional manual
> intervention, there needs to be a semi-manual install process.
> But most of the time, I really don't care.  If an application requires
> shared libraries, then dependencies should take care of it.  Any
> manager will be downloaded and installed automatically, as will the
> libraries themselves.  Yes, display some kind of process, and yes,
> have a way of displaying what's installed, yes.  But don't make me,
> and more important even users, who want it to "just work" perform any
> kind of manual steps.

I'm not quite clear about what you're suggesting. Is it anything other
than RiscPkg? If not, Alan's scheme incorporates that already. If
someone chooses to use RiscPkg (and the application author packages
their app) then everything can be done from inside RiscPkg.

> It has been precisely this point that has been a huge hindrance with
> users installing software, even if it's "obvious" how to download and
> unzip/drag/copy files.

I agree we shouldn't assume things about what's "obvious" to users - but
that's where this thread started, so hopefully we're moved forward
already. :)


Adam Richardson          Carpe Diem

More information about the gcc mailing list