[Gretl-users] Linux versions of gretl

As a newcomer, I apologise if this e-mail raises an issue that has been settled in the past. My query or suggestion concerns the possibility of providing a statically linked version of gretl for Linux. [The Windows & Mac versions are necessarily statically linked because it cannot be assumed that users have the necessary dlls.] The query is prompted by two considerations. A. Over a period of several months I have been experimenting with different Linux desktop distributions in an attempt to find a satisfactory way of avoiding Windows Vista. Whenever I attempt to install gretl on a new distribution, it is necessary to look around for rpm or deb files that resolve gretl's dependencies - particularly versions of BLAS, LAPACK, GNU C & Fortran libraries. In some cases (eg Xandros & Centos) that is only possible by going back to quite outdated versions of gretl (1.5 or earlier) because the OS packagers are deliberately using "oldstable" or "stable" versions of master distributions (especially Debian). Even popular distributions such as Ubuntu and SimplyMEPIS have libraries that are not compatible with the most recent versions of gretl - at least not without going to considerable effort. For a rapidly evolving program it is somewhat unsatisfactory to have to rely upon a version that is quite old. B. Just yesterday, I encountered a different version of the same problem. I have decided to use Suse Linux for my main systems - in particular Novell's Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop (SLED) which is generally compatible with OpenSuse 10.1 & 10.2. I tried to install gretl 1.6.5 and failed because it could not resolve the dependency for libpng12.so.0 (a PNG graphics library). So I tried version 1.6.2 instead and there were no problems. Given the recent history of gretl releases I assume that the change was made in version 1.6.3 but it illustrates the problem of resolving an ever changing set of dependencies as the program is extended. I notice that most providers of commercial or quasi-commercial software - eg Stata, spreadsheets - provide statically linked versions of their packages or a choice. The main reason for avoiding static linking is that it increases the size of the package, perhaps a lot. But the difference between the sizes of the gretl executables for Windows and Linux is not that large and few users have significantly concerns about storage capacity. In principle, a statically linked version should execute more quickly, but I understand that the difference is rarely noticeable. Still, on grounds of convenience and extending the reach of gretl I think that it would be desirable to offer a statically linked version if the burden of doing so is not too large. I have no knowledge of whether the main user community for gretl relies upon Windows. There is also a matter of philosophy - most desktop versions of Linux give high priority to stability and security rather than having the most recent versions of software. On the other hand, I think that desktop Linux is a genuine competitor to Windows Vista (because most versions run on much lower specification hardware), especially in universities, government organisations and developing countries. Offering gretl for Linux in a version that causes the minimum of hassle of installation would play to the advantage of low cost and minimum hardware requirements. Gordon Hughes