Re: gEDA: Icarus Verilog Snapshot 20030329 [Mac OS X binaries]

[Stephen Williams <steve-at-NOSPAMicarus_dot_com>]

clepple@ghz.cc said:
> Question for the other OS X users on the list: how many of you are
> using  Fink? What about other packaging systems (e.g. the ports
> system)? 

My personal bias is to use the most native packaging available for
a given platform. For Windows, I wrote a proper installer that
smells like the installers people are accustomed to for other
products. For Linux, There are rpms for RedHat/Mandrake, and there
are Debian packages for Debian users. For Solaris, there are
Solaris .pkg packages.

The idea is for the installer to take on the character of the
target system. Users are most likely Verilog designers and not
in any way interested in futzing with manual or obscure installs.
I want the experience for user X to meet expectations, starting
with a comfortable and positive experience at install time.

I don't have a MacOSX system, or personal experience with MacOSX,
so I know not what is comfortable there. I therefore rely on others
to speak up and motivate the volunteer packager.

Once a packaging format is chosen for Mac OS X, I can include any
package configuration files in the same way I include the .spec
and Solaris package config files, if that helps.

As for the specific matter of Fink or not Fink, it seems that
Icarus Verilog on Mac OS X already requires it. The latest snap-
shots even more then previously. This suggests that the most positive
experience would come from a Fink package that automatically manages
dependencies, a la RPMS for Linux. Can Fink packages do that?
-- 
Steve Williams                "The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
steve at icarus.com           But I have promises to keep,
steve at picturel.com         and lines to code before I sleep,
http://www.picturel.com       And lines to code before I sleep."