[m-dev.] Proposed installation profiles

Julien Fischer jfischer at opturion.com
Fri Oct 23 14:01:46 AEDT 2015

On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Zoltan Somogyi wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:42:46 +1100 (AEDT), Julien Fischer <jfischer at opturion.com> wrote:
>> There will be a new option to the configure script, '--enable-install-profile',
> The "enable-" prefix suggests that you could also disable a profile,
> so I would suggest a different name,

IIRC, we're restricted to using the AC_ARG_ENABLE and AC_ARG_WTIH macros,
which means the options are going to be have to be of the form

We can catch the use of --disable-install-profile when the configure
script is run.

> even if that requires a bit more work in configure.ac. How about
> simply --install-profile=...?

I think it will be more than a bit of work and making our configure script
even more complicated is the last thing I really want to do!

>> that allows users to select an "installation profile", which is a set of library
>> grades to install.  Below is a proposed set of installation profiles.
> I like this set of profiles. I have just two concerns.
> One: should the debug profile include ssdebug for hlc? I don't use it,
> so I don't know how generally useful it is.

I don't think the .ssdebug grades are in a state documentation-wise or
testing-wise where we should consider them stable.  If that situation
changes, then it would make sense for the debug profile to include
hlc.gc.ssdebug, java.ssdebug, csharp.ssdebug etc.

> Two: the "all" profile should be given a name that makes it clear
> that it includes grades that are very unlikely to be useful.

Perhaps, "extra" or "inefficient" (we already have an
"--enable-inefficient-grade" option)?

Are there any other opinions on the profile names?


More information about the developers mailing list