From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,fc2b5af8782d4ca3 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Received: by 10.180.106.161 with SMTP id gv1mr409289wib.4.1362128110941; Fri, 01 Mar 2013 00:55:10 -0800 (PST) Path: g1ni39572wig.0!nntp.google.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: can one make a static build Ada+GUI GTK application? Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:56:33 +0100 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: References: <20130228010057.13659976@hactar.xn--rombobjrn-67a.se> <1jakth6zgpm7u.1jynuosu6x48.dlg@40tude.net> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: FbOMkhMtVLVmu7IwBnt1tw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 2013-03-01T09:56:33+01:00 List-Id: On Thu, 28 Feb 2013 17:16:29 -0600, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote: > On 2/28/2013 7:44 AM, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > >> You were not specific about the OS. The way software is packaged and >> deployed clearly depends on the OS. If you want to distribute an >> application for an OS, you MUST do it in a way usual for that OS. Sorry. > > My main goal was to see if I can make small GUI app in Ada > that a user on the other end can just simply download > and run it. This is exactly how msi file works. > Linux packaging and deployment which some here seem to > think is so cool, is not only confusing, but I think it is > fundamentally broken. It is not cool, but it is light years ahead of the Windows' way. > Even using a GUI based package manager and searching for a package, > one is presented with a list of many different names > and variations of the same package and the user is asked > to select which to use. You are switching the subject. The user already knows that he wanted to install your package named "foo." The only thing for him to do is yum install foo That would resolve all dependencies and install any missing packages. > Installing an app, ends up breaking the app into > 100 different places on the system when header files go on place, > man pages to another, .so libraries to another place, .a > libraries to another and config files yet to another and so on. That is the fate of any file-based OS. If there were no Windows and Unix we would have another world of OO OS without files. But the world is what it is. > An example is with Java and JavaFX, where one can include the > JRE (run-time library) and any other 3rd party Jar files and > package everything in one self contained one bundle file. How is it different to having a package? Except that Java introduces one more dependency on itself? -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de