[racket-dev] Installing subsets of Racket

Sounds good!

I think as long as it's possible to somehow choose between byte-code and
source-code packages/distributions, there should not be too much to worry
about. My server would be very happy with byte-code packages, and my
desktop with a full source-code Racket.

Laurent


On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Laurent,
>
> I think that the solution to this are "binary" builds.... versions of
> a package that only have the bytecode and documentation.
>
> We're a bit behind on binary builds, because when they were discussed
> for the main repository [1] they were rejected. I hope to be able to
> still provide them for ring-0 packages through the results of DrDr
> running tests (and thus compiling) on those packages, but it's in the
> future.
>
> The result would be that when you installed a package in "binary"
> form, you would only get the "deps" and not the "build-deps". (And
> you'd probably get those in binary form too.)
>
> Jay
>
> 1. http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@racket-lang.org/msg08879.html
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Laurent <laurent.orseau at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > (this is not a complain, just an inquiry)
> >
> > While installing Racket on a small server, I wanted to avoid installing
> gui
> > and doc related libraries.
> > The minimal install was great!
> >
> > Then I wanted to install a package of my own (the aptly named "bazaar"),
> > which requires "images" and other gui libs (which I actually would not
> use
> > on the server), among other things, but no doc
> >
> > But the "images" package draws racket-doc and gui-doc dependencies,
> which in
> > turn draws practically all of Racket. And it then takes a much longer
> time
> > for `raco setup` to do its job that I had hoped for.
> >
> > Certainly, this can be resolved by splitting "images" and "bazaar" into
> lib,
> > gui and docs packages, but I foresee another problem:
> > It's difficult to enforce such a split for third-party libraries, as it
> puts
> > the burden on the user.
> > And the first package like that to be installed will again draw all of
> > Racket dependencies.
> >
> > This is probably not a trivial matter, but what can be done about this?
> >
> > My dream would be that gui and doc dependencies are never triggered,
> without
> > preventing the packages I actually use to be downloaded, but I don't know
> > how this could actually be ensured without a good amount of magic.
> >
> > Merely preventing downloads does not sound like a good option though.
> >
> > I bet you've already discussed this far and wide, so are there any plans?
> >
> > Laurent
> >
> > _________________________
> >   Racket Developers list:
> >   http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu>
> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
> http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay
>
> "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20130916/2e9b59fd/attachment-0001.html>