WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Author Topic: Compile-essentials inconsistency  (Read 7199 times)

Offline althalus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
Compile-essentials inconsistency
« on: May 04, 2013, 03:32:51 PM »
compiletc.tcz for x86 includes bison.tcz in it's dependencies. Compile-essentials.tcz for rpi doesn't include bison.tcz. Is this deliberate, or....?



(ps, the naming difference for these two packages that are essentially the same thing for the different versions of core has always bugged me. Anyone know how that came about?)

Offline bmarkus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7170
    • My Community Forum
Re: Compile-essentials inconsistency
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2013, 04:00:59 PM »
It is not inconsistency. They are different packages for different purpuses.
Béla
Ham Radio callsign: HA5DI

"Amateur Radio: The First Technology-Based Social Network."

Offline althalus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
Re: Compile-essentials inconsistency
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2013, 02:03:30 AM »
Can you elaborate a bit on that? Is not the purpose of compile-essentials, like compiletc, to set up an environment suitable for compiling other programs?

Offline bmarkus

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7170
    • My Community Forum
Re: Compile-essentials inconsistency
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2013, 03:04:22 AM »
compile-essential.tcz provides the minimum set to compile essential Linux C/C++ programs. It was created in the beginning when most of compiletc.tcz dependencies didn't exist.

It is another question to create compiletc.tcz now when nearly all necessary ingedients available in the repo.

But it is not blocking you, as compiletc.tcz is a meta extension only, its dependencies are on the repo wheteher you have compiletc.tcz or not.

Anyhow, I will make compiletc.tcz
Béla
Ham Radio callsign: HA5DI

"Amateur Radio: The First Technology-Based Social Network."

Offline althalus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
Re: Compile-essentials inconsistency
« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2013, 03:07:08 AM »
Ok, that makes more sense now, thanks for taking the time to explain.