Hi Jeff, Matt We are maintaining binaries to simplify the export procedure. Just to give an idea: in the past two years we had more than 40000 downloads of the binaries compared to 8000 for the source. We know that we have to improve the makefile mechanism. This is becoming pretty complex, in particular with the many dialects of Linux, compiler versions, glibc, etc. I was hoping more stability in this area. Concerning CVS, Fons has nearly finished the procedure to create/maintain the ROOT CVS site. He will make an announcement once this is ready. Rene Brun On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Matthew D. Langston wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > Jeff Templon wrote: > > > > I have downloaded and installed ROOT version 2.21/01 which is the most > > recent version mentioned on the ROOT pages which is appropriate for > > RedHat 5.2 system. All other binary kits require a more recent > > version of the egcs suite. I will upgrade to the more recent ROOT > > version when I upgrade RedHat versions. > > I have written simple instructions on how to compile ROOT from *pure > source* that doesn't require any binaries from the binary distribution. > I would suggest following these instructions to get ROOT to build on the > system you want to use, with the C++ compiler you want to use. The > instructions on the ROOT web page and in the AA_INSTALL file concerning > compiling ROOT from source are not enough, and following them verbatim > does not work (at least for the past few versions of ROOT) - it appears > that these instructions are not tested often. > > I have posted my build instructions to roottalk in the past (see > http://root.cern.ch/root/roottalk/roottalk99/1605.html, for example) but > I have also included them as an attachment for your convenience. These > instructions were originally written for "RedHat Linux 6.0 Intel", but > they are easily adapted to all platforms. Please let me know if you > have any problems with them. > > Note that my instructions tell you (as does the ROOT Team's > instructions) to "download the binary distribution that is closest to > your platform", but this is only because there are some source files in > the binary distribution that you need *in addition* to the ROOT source > tarball. My instructions tell you (and show you how) to delete all of > the binary files, so that you really are compiling ROOT directly from > source. > > The ROOT binaries provided by the ROOT Team are extremely valuable to > those users who are lucky enough to have an Operating System and C++ > Compiler that the ROOT Team supports. These binaries have been tested > by the ROOT Team, and are therefore extremely easy to install for these > users. > > However, the ROOT Team will never be able to provide binaries for all of > the different variations and combinations of Operating Systems and C++ > compilers that exist. For example, the ROOT Team will never be able to > provide a single ROOT binary for RedHat x.y that will work for "RedHat > x.y users", even if those same users all started out from the same > RedHat x.y CD. > > I would suggest that ROOT should change its distribution model to focus > primarily on source distributions. Providing binary distributions for a > few reference platforms should receive only secondary importance. > Encouraging users to install ROOT from source will only make ROOT much, > much better (the reasons for which are numerous, so I'll save them for > another thread). > > When the ROOT source code version management system is finally changed > from CMZ to CVS, this will more easily allow for the distribution model > that I am proposing. This change to CVS is supposed to happen soon, so > hopefully compiling ROOT from source will work better in the > not-to-distant future. > > -- > Matthew D. Langston > SLD, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center > langston@SLAC.Stanford.EDU >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 04 2000 - 00:43:37 MET