Re: Tk on AIX ???
From: Jeff Hobbs (jeffh_at_activestate.com)
Date: 01/26/04
- Next message: Tom Poindexter: "Re: Tk on AIX ???"
- Previous message: Jeff Hobbs: "Re: wishx (tclX) segmentation fault"
- Maybe in reply to: Russ: "Tk on AIX ???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:07:20 GMT
Anthony Johnson wrote:
> I didn't mean to imply our problems were with Tcl. We just couldn't get
> support on AIX, and ActiveState only provides tcl (ActiveTcl?) in binary
> on the same platforms that scriptics did, so I assume the same lack of
> AIX interest that Scriptics had.
Ah, yes, that's understandable if you assume that ActiveTcl
is all we support - but far from it. That's just the common
systems. We provide support for numerous other platforms,
but don't make those available because of the requisite
higher maintenance load for them.
>> I can say that AIX is not the best platform to have to
>> work on. Bang for the buck isn't high, and general
>> usability is below modern unix variants. I can say that
> Well, I have to totally disagree with your first statement. I find AIX
> far more usable than most other UNIX variants, even if compiling GNU
> software may be a bit more challenging. This, and their HUGE customer
> base, is why we chose to support them over other UNIX variants.
I make my opinion from over a decade of unix experience with
various systems. The thing I find funniest is the relatively
high proportion of questions I get from IBM exployees
themselves about building on AIX.
> We only compile on AIX 4.3. however, since we have to provide back-level
> support. We also support Linux on IBM pSeries and Intel (glibc 2.1.3)
> systems. We got tclX8.3 working on all of these, but I haven't been able
> to get to 8.4. I was waiting for a tclX 8.4 update, which never came. I
> don't know if this is still a problem, I just haven't summoned the
> courage to try again lately. I have to admit I'm not very experienced in
> GNU builds or shared libraries. We also don't want to hack our own
> version of tcl(x) since it makes it more difficult to maintain.
TclX 8.4 has been stuck in CVS without any impetus to polish off
the release. We have been including it in ActiveTcl for years
though, and don't have any issues with building it across a very
wide variety of platforms (including several AIX variants).
> We have a number of standalone programs that run under either tcl or
> wishx. They all use many of the same tcl procedures, so a single wrapped
> application may not be feasible. It might be feasible to wrap our main
> GUI since it uses many functions that are not shared, but it also loads
> other shared procedures. We've been using tclx since (7.2?), and we've
> not updated it to use packages.
This model does not preclude starpacks / starkits. You could have
one expanded shell that provides the base for all the others.
Moving to a package model will make your code more maintainable
and flexible in the long run.
--
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy
http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos
- Next message: Tom Poindexter: "Re: Tk on AIX ???"
- Previous message: Jeff Hobbs: "Re: wishx (tclX) segmentation fault"
- Maybe in reply to: Russ: "Tk on AIX ???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
