Re: gnuplot-4.2.rc1: --program-suffix and gnuplot_x11

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Are there two different situations?  One is sort of a custom version of 
gnuplot_x11, the other is more a general and portable version of gnuplot_x11.

Should there be a way to change the name of "gnuplot_x11"?  For custom versions 
perhaps?  There is this approach:

 > I just leave the patched executable in the patched source
 > directory where it was built, and setenv GNUPLOT_DRIVER_DIR
 > to point there if I want to test it.

but that isn't exactly the most proficient method.  I'd have to keep changing 
GNUPLOT_DRIVER_DIR if I want to alternate between "gnuplot" and "mygnuplot", and 
I wonder if I can run both at the same time.  From the standpoint of a multiuser 
environment like a computer center, that approach isn't so much "automating" the 
process as it is just shifting the burdon of configuring things to a later 
point.  For the person who is not the one building gnuplot it is difficult to 
remember such things.

If customization means that "gnuplot_x11" name should change, does there need to 
be independent control of name alteration for "gnuplot" and "gnuplot_x11"? 
Probably not.  If the user wants that kind of sophistication as a configure 
option then I'd think the user is smart enough to be moving the executables to 
desired directories.

There definitely needs to be multi-environment support, but I would argue that 
that should be taken care of without the users direction.  Shouldn't have to 
think about that.  I would think there are autoconf commands for that sort of thing.

It is hard to say what to do here.  My gut feeling is that there should be two 
methods of setting this up.

One other comment is that I've tended to not so much think of gnuplot_x11 as 
being a separate program.  If we are at the point of considering gnuplot-x11 
running on one machine and gnuplot on another, it might then be pertinent to 
start talking version numbers and having gnuplot check that its version is 
compatible with the gnuplot_x11 version.

Dan


Ethan Merritt wrote:
> I don't think this is the right approach, because it does
> not truly allow for the general case of a mixed architecture
> environment.  What if gnuplot_x11 is running on a different
> machine than gnuplot?  What if gnuplot was built 64-bit, but
> gnuplot_x11 was built 32-bit?
> 
> What I have seen work for other program packages is to leave
> the name of the executable unchanged, but install multiple
> architecture-specific executables into parallel directories.
> The correct executable is selected by virtue of the PATH
> set for your current session. In the case of gnuplot you
> could also use the GNUPLOT_DRIVER_DIR environmental variable
> to control this, but you'd have to set it in an 
> architecture-dependent fashion via your login script.
> 
> In other words, if we are to do this at all, I think the
> correct approach is to leave the file name of gnuplot_x11
> unchanged, but teach the install procedure to create a
> directory name from the architecture type.  Or just add
> a set of instructions for manual installation of this
> one component in a mixed-architecture environment.
>   
> 
>>In my case, I used --program-suffix for a multi-architecture build.
>>But previously I also used --program-suffix="-patched" to distinguish
>>my modified version from the upstream version.  IIRC I also had to
>>symlink gnuplot_x11 accordingly back then.
> 
> 

> 
> 


-- 

Dan Sebald
phone: 608 256 7718
email: daniel DOT sebald AT ieee DOT org
URL: http://webpages DOT charter DOT net/dsebald/