Re: [ng-spice-devel] Approaching rework 14


To ng-spice-devel@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it
From Al Davis <aldavis@ieee.org>
Date Thu, 25 Jan 2001 10:11:18 -0800
Delivered-To mailing list ng-spice-devel@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it
In-Reply-To <CF654D964573D311A1CA0090278A36FF4CBD6B@EDIN_EXM1 >
Mailing-List contact ng-spice-devel-help@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it; run by ezmlm
References <CF654D964573D311A1CA0090278A36FF4CBD6B@EDIN_EXM1 >
Reply-To ng-spice-devel@ieee.ing.uniroma1.it

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Gillespie, Alan wrote:
> By the way, do I need Tex or Latex, or whatever, to compile
> ng-spice ? It seems to take up about 100MB of disk space, and
> I can't see what it's doing for me. 

The ACS manual uses Latex.  I supply it as pdf and html (compiled 
versions), so go ahead and remove it.  If you do, the worst that will 
happen is that you need to install it again.

>  ....My small brain doesn't
> work well with the kind of gibberish that you have to talk
> to it, so I don't think I'll be learning that language

All languages look like gibberish the first time.


> until I've learned GNU "option-speak", "makefile-speak",
>  "autoconf-speak", "cvs-language", etc., etc.

I never liked autoconf.  I would rather just edit the Makefile 
directly.  If a program has more nonportabilities than a simple 
Makefile and one pair or source files can cope with, there is a 
problem.

For basic use, "make" is really easy.  It does a lot past basic use, 
and unfortunately the way it is presented makes you plow through all 
the extras just to use the simple part.  Autoconf generates a really 
bloated Makefile that uses it all, and is incredibly confusing.

For cvs, all you need to know is commit and checkout.  Don't bother 
with the rest.

Star Office does a pretty good job at cloning the Microsoft tools.  
The formats are compatible, and the user interface is similar.


I understand the frustration.  Moving from unix to windows is just as 
bad, for the first couple of months.  Then it is worse because of all 
the stuff that is missing.

Have you considered a Macintosh??  The new OS-X seems to be pretty 
cool.  I used a Next for years.  The balance between the power of 
unix and the ease of use of a Mac is wonderful.  Everything I have 
used since is a letdown, even 10 years later.

Try "Redmond Linux".  I have not used it, but they claim it is 
optimized to make the transition from Windows to Linux easy.  It is a 
lightweight.  Lots of stuff is missing, intentionally, to make it 
easier to use.

Partial thread listing: