[GRASS5] Grass 5.3 on Mac OSX

[Markus Neteler]

On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 10:31:14PM +0000, Paul Kelly wrote:
> Hello
> Just catching up on some old e-mails from when I was away for a while:
> 
> Michael Barton wrote:
> [...]
> > Suggestion: Right now, 5.0.x and 5.3 both create grass5 directories and
> > install themselves into /usr/local/bin as grass5. 
> 
> I think that counts as a bug but 5.3 is only experimental and has only
> been in existence as a separate version number for a few months so there
> is plenty of time to fix it.
> 
> > I much prefer the way
> > Markus has set up 5.7. It installs in /usr/local/grass57 AND in
> > /usr/local/bin as grass57. 

Yes, it should be changed to 'grass53' IMHO (in fact I have solved
it like that for month in my own installation).
 
> Yes, although it is not historically consistent (GRASS 4.3 is started by
> typing grass4.3 i.e. with a decimal point in the name). However most of
> Europe uses a comma (,) rather than a full stop (.) for a decimal
> point---perhaps that was the reason it was dropped, to avoid any
> potential confusion? Markus?

I didn't see to much point in keeping the dot. 
 
> > This way, someone can install a new version
> > without overwriting an older one. Currently, can only avoid this by
> > changing both the /bin/ and /prefix/ directories in ./config. You can
> > also easily choose which version you want to run at a particular time
> > without trying to remember a special path.
> > 
> > Question: After the fact can I change the name of /usr/local/bin/grass5
> > to /usr/local/bin/grass53? Same for gmake5 and gmakelink5 files, and
> > /usr/local/grass5 directory? Or will this completely confuse GRASS?
> 
> Yes they should probably be changed although it is arguable if gmake5
> and gmakelinks5 should/need to be changed as they are only used for
> re-compling modules. I feel it should probably be grass54 or grass5.4
> rather than grass53, as 5.3 and 5.4 are the experimental and stable
> lines of essentially the same version and there may be no point in
> changing the name of the startup script suddenly when we release the
> stable version.

Why not? I find it confusing to type 'grass54' if it starts 5.3.
 
> By the same logic the startup script for 5.7 should actually be called
> grass58? I may well have missed something in the logic of my thinking
> here; what do other people think?

I don't like that too much.

There is always a period of testing after creating a release. So
there is time (weeks usually) to understand that a version was
changed.

But the next 5.7 release will be called 5.7.0. So, in 1-10 years,
when 5.8 is on the way, we'll call it 5.8.0.

> > This way, a tarball I create wouldn't overwrite someone's existing
> > grass 5.0.x files when untarred.
> 
> I definitely think the 5.3 startup script should have a different name
> from the 5.0 one and unless there are objections I will see that it is
> changed before the 5.3.0 release is made.

Let's change (also gmake53 and gmakelinks53). 

Markus