Update on Hugo for Unix

(Ice Cream Jonsey) #21

In the process of updating the Hugo IF Wiki page, it occurs to me that we are basically asking everyone who wants the compiler for Unix and Mac to download the source and compile it themselves. I just wanted to check to see that I have that correct. That seems very unfriendly to anyone trying to download what they need to write Hugo games unless I am missing something.

Is there any reason for me to not make the Unix and Mac Hugo compilers available as a download so people can avoid the step of compiling it themselves?


(Andrew Plotkin) #22

Compile-your-own is standard practice on Linux, because of the very wide variation of what counts as “Linux”. I never trust that any Linux binary I compile will run for anybody else.

Releasing a MacOS binary is a good idea, but you might have to figure out some stuff about static linking. (I never have, I’m afraid, so I can’t help.)



In my experience running one of the “fringe” source-based distros that is largely made up of original code (Exherbo), most binaries that I attempted to use (games like The End Is Nigh, source code editors like 4Coder, other examples that I’m blanking on) “just worked” unless they were severely out of date or needed additional configuration because of the way that they were packaged (and you can see on the Exherbo package repo that there are a lot of binaries that are only packaged as .debs that are configured to be auto-installed alongside their dependencies on Exherbo). Most distros run on what is essentially the same Linux kernel, so quite a lot works the same from distro to distro.

In short, while it very well might not work for any of a large number of reasons (more of which probably have to do with the specific packages available on one’s computer at any given time than anything else), there’s no harm in making a binary available. If there are any specific pre-requisites for the binary, just make them known and have a link to the source code nearby so that those that do have issues can compile their own.

In fact, I’d back up the statement that not having a binary available is probably doing more harm than good because the average user that’s on Linux is probably on a binary-based distro and isn’t accustomed to configuring and building applications. I don’t have any stats for that, but it would be in line with basically every other operating system and, hell, even applications like Gazebo (which are specifically made for robot programmers that use Linux) provide a .deb package alongside the source code.

This got a bit longer than I intended. tl;dr: It certainly couldn’t hurt to offer a binary.


(Ice Cream Jonsey) #24

Thank you both!

On Hugo’s IF Wiki page I put a link to the compiled version I use every day. There is also a link to the bitbucket repo, which does not have a binary. So this way there’s options for people to try it out already compiled or build it themselves, they should have all the info and options now. :slight_smile:



There’s also my Github repo: github.com/curiousdannii/hugo

I merged Gargyole and Nikos’ hugo-unix commit histories together. When we discussed it previously I proposed bumping to version 3.3, and Kent said that made sense. Note that I’ve only modified the runner, not the compiler.



For Macs we could create a Brew tap that would greatly simplify the building process on a Mac.



This isn’t exactly a unix question, but it relates to Hugor and I didn’t think it deserved its own topic. Is there any chance of a screen-reader friendly version of Hugor?



I hope I can add accessibility support, but not sure when.



Excellent. Hugor is, by far, the best interpreter on the market today. The fact that hugor and screen readers don’t get along kinda sucks, but hopefully that’ll be added soon. Then I can take advantage of the new Hugor opcode stuff in Roodylib (and actually test it!) That is, if I ever decide to use hugo for anything.