It seems to be usual to "download D" and then not have the thing work off the bat. (d.D.learn has some excellent examples, and many of them by able people, some even with a long C++ background.)

With two compilers, all the platforms (Windows, Mac, various Linuxes) and at least two lucrative base libraries (Tango and Phobos) -- and especially since the newcomer can't simply choose like "compiler, OS, lib, root/luser" etc, and simply have a self-installing complete binary automatically sent to you (hint, hint), I suggest the following:

Just like hello.d we should have a checkinstall.d that you should try to build. It would have static asserts (or whatever it takes) that inform the user about what's wrong. Probably one should first run a checkinstall.{sh|bat} too to inform of the most basic problems.

Such should be standard issue with all distributions.

Today, many end up tweaking paths, library paths, choosing install directories, contents and placements of the "ini" file, and whatnot. Of course such could ultimately be avoided by adequate and prominent documentation and targeted binary installs. But the checkinstall stuff is more robust and could in principle be bullet proof. As in, either it passes, or it discovers what's wrong. Oh, and how to remedy that.

After all, there are only so many places where the train can derail, but figuring out these is unnecessary hard for precisely the people who do stumble on them.

I completely agree.  D should be so easy to begin using that people will
become fans by accident.

Georg Wrede wrote:
> It seems to be usual to "download D" and then not have the thing work off the bat. (d.D.learn has some excellent examples, and many of them by able people, some even with a long C++ background.)
> 
> With two compilers, all the platforms (Windows, Mac, various Linuxes) and at least two lucrative base libraries (Tango and Phobos) -- and especially since the newcomer can't simply choose like "compiler, OS, lib, root/luser" etc, and simply have a self-installing complete binary automatically sent to you (hint, hint), I suggest the following:
> 
> Just like hello.d we should have a checkinstall.d that you should try to build. It would have static asserts (or whatever it takes) that inform the user about what's wrong. Probably one should first run a checkinstall.{sh|bat} too to inform of the most basic problems.
> 
> Such should be standard issue with all distributions.
> 
> Today, many end up tweaking paths, library paths, choosing install directories, contents and placements of the "ini" file, and whatnot. Of course such could ultimately be avoided by adequate and prominent documentation and targeted binary installs. But the checkinstall stuff is more robust and could in principle be bullet proof. As in, either it passes, or it discovers what's wrong. Oh, and how to remedy that.
> 
> After all, there are only so many places where the train can derail, but figuring out these is unnecessary hard for precisely the people who do stumble on them.

Georg Wrede wrote:

> With two compilers, all the platforms (Windows, Mac, various Linuxes) and at least two lucrative base libraries (Tango and Phobos) -- and especially since the newcomer can't simply choose like "compiler, OS, lib, root/luser" etc, and simply have a self-installing complete binary automatically sent to you (hint, hint), I suggest the following:

I built binaries of D 1.0, and plan to build another set with Tango 1.0
They didn't make it upstream as official binaries, simply because the
maintainers (DMD and GDC) prefers to offer ZIP archives or TBZ tarballs.

When/if they do, the gdcwin/gdcmac/gdcgnu projects will all be obsolete.

> Just like hello.d we should have a checkinstall.d that you should try to build. It would have static asserts (or whatever it takes) that inform the user about what's wrong. Probably one should first run a checkinstall.{sh|bat} too to inform of the most basic problems.
> 
> Such should be standard issue with all distributions.

I'm sure such a program or script would be a welcome addition to D.

> Today, many end up tweaking paths, library paths, choosing install directories, contents and placements of the "ini" file, and whatnot. Of course such could ultimately be avoided by adequate and prominent documentation and targeted binary installs. But the checkinstall stuff is more robust and could in principle be bullet proof. As in, either it passes, or it discovers what's wrong. Oh, and how to remedy that.

All my GDC installers follow the same pattern, no tweaking required.
You can just install the EXE/PKG/RPM, and it will use the standard
system locations for the installation. No documentation yet, except:

http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?D__Tutorial/InstallingDCompiler

--anders

Hi,

I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32 machine under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno setup script for D so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup is for free, but i'll have to read the licence so there are no licence infringements.

This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team :)

regards and give me some time, possibly I have some this evening







Georg Wrede wrote:
> It seems to be usual to "download D" and then not have the thing work off the bat. (d.D.learn has some excellent examples, and many of them by able people, some even with a long C++ background.)
> 
> With two compilers, all the platforms (Windows, Mac, various Linuxes) and at least two lucrative base libraries (Tango and Phobos) -- and especially since the newcomer can't simply choose like "compiler, OS, lib, root/luser" etc, and simply have a self-installing complete binary automatically sent to you (hint, hint), I suggest the following:
> 
> Just like hello.d we should have a checkinstall.d that you should try to build. It would have static asserts (or whatever it takes) that inform the user about what's wrong. Probably one should first run a checkinstall.{sh|bat} too to inform of the most basic problems.
> 
> Such should be standard issue with all distributions.
> 
> Today, many end up tweaking paths, library paths, choosing install directories, contents and placements of the "ini" file, and whatnot. Of course such could ultimately be avoided by adequate and prominent documentation and targeted binary installs. But the checkinstall stuff is more robust and could in principle be bullet proof. As in, either it passes, or it discovers what's wrong. Oh, and how to remedy that.
> 
> After all, there are only so many places where the train can derail, but figuring out these is unnecessary hard for precisely the people who do stumble on them.

Nicolai Waniek wrote:

> I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32 machine
> under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno setup script for D
> so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup is for free, but i'll have
> to read the licence so there are no licence infringements.

We wrote scripts for NSIS, which is free (both cost and license).
Think I still have them up on my site, if you want to have a look:

http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmc-setup.html (for DMC 8.49)
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/dmd-setup.html (for DMD 1.00)

> This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team  :) 

Think Tango already has a redistribution agreement for DMD,
and offer installers of Tango and DMD (but without Phobos) ?

Look at http://dsource.org/projects/tango/wiki/DmdDownloads

--anders

Nicolai Waniek wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32 machine under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno setup script for D so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup is for free, but i'll have to read the licence so there are no licence infringements.
> 
> This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team :)

As far as I know, we already have an Inno Setup installer for Tango, bundling DMD. Feel free to suggest improvements though :)

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango

Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32 machine
> under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno setup script for D
> so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup is for free, but i'll have
> to read the licence so there are no licence infringements.
> 
> This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team :)
> 
> regards and give me some time, possibly I have some this evening

This made me think: would that script be responsible for looking at ftp.digitalmars.com and installing any *newer* releases as well?

This is one thing that's really missing - installing it the first time is one thing, but keeping in sync is another.  So much software these days "phones home" on demand*, so why not D?

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32
>> machine under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno
>> setup script for D so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup
>> is for free, but i'll have to read the licence so there are no licence
>> infringements.
>>
>> This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team :)
> 
> As far as I know, we already have an Inno Setup installer for Tango,
> bundling DMD. Feel free to suggest improvements though :)
> 

I mentioned this further up the thread: Tango needs an "updater" that can be run to update your Tango installation. Upgrading through the past two betas, has been kind of messy since the installer just wants to overwrite everything.

IMO, this would also make installing DMD compatibility releases a breeze.

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

Pragma wrote:

> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> Nicolai Waniek wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32 machine under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno setup script for D so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup is for free, but i'll have to read the licence so there are no licence infringements.
>>>
>>> This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team :)
>> 
>> As far as I know, we already have an Inno Setup installer for Tango, bundling DMD. Feel free to suggest improvements though :)
>> 
> 
> I mentioned this further up the thread: Tango needs an "updater" that can be run to update your Tango installation. Upgrading through the past two betas, has been kind of messy since the installer just wants to overwrite everything.
> 
> IMO, this would also make installing DMD compatibility releases a breeze.
> 

Please create a ticket, but I will crack the whip on the next chance ;)

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Pragma wrote:
> 
>> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>>> Nicolai Waniek wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I agree with you and as soon as I have some spare time (and a win32
>>>> machine under my fingers) and if you guys wish it, i'll write an inno
>>>> setup script for D so walter could package a Win32 installer. Inno Setup
>>>> is for free, but i'll have to read the licence so there are no licence
>>>> infringements.
>>>>
>>>> This could - of course - then be adopted by the tango team :)
>>> As far as I know, we already have an Inno Setup installer for Tango,
>>> bundling DMD. Feel free to suggest improvements though :)
>>>
>> I mentioned this further up the thread: Tango needs an "updater" that can
>> be run to update your Tango installation. Upgrading through the past two
>> betas, has been kind of messy since the installer just wants to overwrite
>> everything.
>>
>> IMO, this would also make installing DMD compatibility releases a breeze.
>>
> 
> Please create a ticket, but I will crack the whip on the next chance ;)
> 

Thanks Lars!

http://www.dsource.org/projects/tango/ticket/457

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo