On Sunday 24 July 2005 7:55 pm, skaller wrote: > On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 17:34 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > > On 23-Jul-2005, skaller wrote: (BTW: Please put your key on a public keyserver, subkeys.pgp.net is recommended.) > > > On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 10:18 +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > > > > Why isn't the object file built from source > > > > > > It is compiled to save time. > > > > Save whose time? People who want precompiled binaries will get them > > from the binary package, with *everything* already compiled for their > > particular architecture. > > > > To allow maximum portability and to ensure dependencies don't get > > accidentally broken without being noticed, the source package should > > only include files that can't be rebuilt from the other source files. > > We are really getting confused here and talking at cross > purposes. > > I'm talking about the binary package(s). Don't forget that Debian is on so many different platforms, compiling the main.o on one platform is simply not going to work on others. The binary package needs to compile main.o for each platform. To do this, the maintainers who port your package to other platforms need to be able to recompile main.o - the source is required for that. Putting the .o in your binary package does not help others create other binary packages for the other platforms that Debian supports. You cannot expect to create all these Debian *binary* packages yourself, the relevant DD's who port your package to the other platforms that Debian officially supports (plus others), are NOT going to be able to use main.o > The question is: > > "where should I *install* a main.o object file?" No, I believe the more important question is: > > > Is the object file part of an existing Debian package? > > > > Yes. There is a bug in the package, the object file > > doesn't go where it 'normally' does.. which lead to the > > question where should a mainline object (.o) file be put.. > > Can you explain this some more? > > I can't see what situation is solved by putting an object file from > one package into a different package's source. Surely the solution is > to fix whatever bug is in the original package? Why can the original bug not be patched? This is an existing Debian package that has a bug, the source code will be available and there shouldn't be licence problems so another option must be to consider repackaging the original source with the bug fixed and making this conflict with the one with the bug. Personally, I don't see how you can fix this for each supported platform via any binary object file shenanigans. > "in which directory should main.o be put > in the end users file system?" OK, but you might not like my answer: Inside a shared library or an executable, built from patched source for each supported platform. :-) Patch / fork the source, it'll sort out all the problems. Honest, take a look around a Debian system installed using only binary packages. How many object files can you find? -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpkqoyGghsJ8.pgp
Description: PGP signature