On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 12:51:43PM +0200, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote: > On Mon, Oct 11, 2004 at 12:37:38PM +0200, Silke Reimer wrote: > > OK. Now back the the grass/gdal problem: > > Indeed the problem is that I need the grass development package for > > gdal to be build against grass. Otherwise we need gdal to build > > grass with general gdal support (i.e. with support for other raster > > and vector formats). > > > > So the build order is > > - create grass development libraries > > - build gdal > > - build grass > > > > Since I can not make gdal build depend on grass and grass build > > depend on gdal in the same time I only see one solution to get both > > pacakges in a clean way into debian: > > > > grass is splitted into two completely independent packages. The > > first one is just meant to build the development packages > > (libgrass-dev) and doesn't create any binary packages at all. The > > second one does build grass and libgrass. > > > > Of course there is also another approach, > that is including gdal source in grass source and > creating the whole packages set from there (i.e. grass and gdal ones) > > > Disadvantage: > > - The grass src will be included twice in debian :-( > > > > Other suggestions? Am I overlooking something? > > > > IF grass-dev would be splittable in original tarball easy that could be > nice: we would have two different sources for grass and grass-dev. Good points. Perhaps we could even split up a grass-dev source from the original grass tarball and just adding this to gdal. Thus we don't have to introduce a new package into grass. Steve, do you know how easy it is to split up grass in such a way? Silke -- Silke Reimer Intevation GmbH http://intevation.de/ FreeGIS http://freegis.org/
Attachment:
pgpzTRibrIQ4D.pgp
Description: PGP signature