[racket-dev] Installing subsets of Racket

great, thanks, that was quick!


On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Robby Findler
<robby at eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote:

> In the meantime, the images pkg is now broken up and images-lib depends
> only on draw-lib (and some unstable stuff), no longer on the full gui
> library or the docs.
>
> Robby
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Laurent <laurent.orseau at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________
>>   Racket Developers list:
>>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20130916/1fc91b8c/attachment.html>