This is just plain wrong. Drop the mega-binary idea. It is dead, dead, dead, dead.
flame down, i know this, we have adressed this. per default, xotcl creates a file called "xotclsh", which is a tclsh script, and NOT the binary you are talking about. Do you oppose as well a tclsh script, having such a name?
Not really, it's only a bit confusing. I do *prefer* that a user just knows that they can rely on 'tclsh' and then uses 'package require xotcl'. Note that the xotclsh and xowish that you build are not actually created +x, which would be an issue for use (at least not on build, maybe on install).
look at our configure stuff, it has changend substantially in the last year. I would say, that i have personally invested over the last year more time into making xotcl's build system
...
as a result, xotcl was added to the tcl/tk distro for max OS X (Aqua). Correct me, if i am wrong, but I got the impression you are taking about the build system of xotcl, as it was about 2 years ago, and not about our current stuff.
I had no issue with building 1.2 myself in the normal way that I expect (which is separate source and build dirs). I'm sorry that using TEA was so time consuming, but the earlier mods that I sent a year ago to your build system took me only a day to make. Of course, I ignored anything but the xotcl package because I believe everything else was "fluff". I think the xotcl 1.2 general organization is much improved though.
I see in your other message that you have the TEA3 stuff working well. I'm glad that you also find the less verbosity helpful - that was a goal. If you want to make a test build available, I will review it and send comments, but cannot do that until Thursday or Friday.
One of the reasons to version TEA_INIT was that upgrading should be easier. However, TEA3 is certainly not "settled". If there is something you don't like about it, or something that would make it easier from your point of view, please tell me. I haven't propagated TEA3 to a lot of extensions yet, so it's not "fully refined".
Note that the advantage of being "TEA compatible" is that it is much easier for distros to add you in (like Steffen did, and we are planning to do in ActiveTcl). It also means that you worry less about build system portability - let the core porters worry about that. For example, with the latest TEA you should be able to make a Win/CE build without any other code changes (assuming you don't call some evil Windows APIs).
Jeff Hobbs, The Tcl Guy http://www.ActiveState.com/, a division of Sophos