1. Creating Install Files
- Posted by SDPringle 1 week ago
- 162 views
There are install scripts in the source code under packaging. I don't really understand how to make a Debian package. I tried to work through the problems in my last commit. One problem is the PDF generation fails. Somehow Creole adds #A0 into the text and TeX chokes on that. I re-encoded include/std/convert.e to UTF-8 but now I get error messages about the hyperlinks with a failure. Creating with a PDF still seems to fail with no archive created. I wasn't successful in create a dpkg file.
Arch Linux is setup for mercurial.
There is the source package directory. If we could get this working, perhaps people will be able to build from C source.
The unix directory is still using SVN version control. So obviously it doesn't work.
The Win32 looks like it will just work.
The OSX one doesn't use any version control stuff at all. It doesn't work currently.
Finally using the Slackware version I was able to get a tree laid out for me and all I needed to do was to archive it. Extracting it to the root of a system results in a functional Euphoria system and it appears to be missing only the PDF. The script instructs me to run `makepkg` but you don't really have to. If you do have Slackware you can make a proper package with it. I don't know the differences are between a proper Slackware package and a tarball.
2. Re: Creating Install Files
- Posted by ghaberek (admin) 6 days ago
- 109 views
There are install scripts in the source code under packaging. I don't really understand how to make a Debian package. I tried to work through the problems in my last commit. One problem is the PDF generation fails. Somehow Creole adds #A0 into the text and TeX chokes on that. I re-encoded include/std/convert.e to UTF-8 but now I get error messages about the hyperlinks with a failure. Creating with a PDF still seems to fail with no archive created. I wasn't successful in create a dpkg file.
Arch Linux is setup for mercurial.
There is the source package directory. If we could get this working, perhaps people will be able to build from C source.
The unix directory is still using SVN version control. So obviously it doesn't work.
The Win32 looks like it will just work.
The OSX one doesn't use any version control stuff at all. It doesn't work currently.
Finally using the Slackware version I was able to get a tree laid out for me and all I needed to do was to archive it. Extracting it to the root of a system results in a functional Euphoria system and it appears to be missing only the PDF. The script instructs me to run `makepkg` but you don't really have to. If you do have Slackware you can make a proper package with it. I don't know the differences are between a proper Slackware package and a tarball.
I've been gradually working on build.mak to create zip (for Windows) or tar (for Linux) packages with binaries, includes, demos, and HTML documentation.
Everything else here is low priority. Most of this is over ten years old and I'm not convinced it all worked anyway. We should probably throw it out and start over.
If you want to focus on something related, the documentation needs a lot of minor corrections and updates, especially with regard to "32-bit" and "4.0" and such.
-Greg
3. Re: Creating Install Files
- Posted by SDPringle 4 days ago
- 79 views
In my article, I mentioned that the Slackware one works in that it makes a file tree of where the files to go to. I made an archive with that and installed on a Debian system. The only problem is that euphoria.pdf creation is broken in the repo. I am no expert on TeX and something in the CREOLE to TeX production results in something my TeX system cannot handle.
! LaTeX Error: Invalid UTF-8 byte "A0.
This is no-breaking space if it were ISO encoding. I thought that changing the convert.e file into UTF-8 would fix that. It didn't. Although it is nice to have UTF-8 everywhere.
If I were to print out the manual I would miss the PDF. I have no intention of doing that though.
It seems to me we should just give up PDF creation, put up tar balls for Linux-i686 and a zip for Windows X. Call it 4.2.0.
Again, Linux is ready for release if you don't care about TeX or PDF. Is it the case that everyone who uses Linux doesn't care about a release. Silence from the other users of the forum will be interpreted by myself as apathy for it just like the previous issue. Perhaps there are only those who have a git checkout of repo that they can build with, or those that never want to upgrade. We don't know.
