[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Autoconf build targets

On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 01:09:30AM -0400, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
> They will have to use the package. This is basically not going to be 
> optional for a while. Sorry, but Debianized and reliable are my 
> priorities for the freebsd source package right now. Flexibility 
> features are going to have to wait.

Do you mean it's a temporarily solution?

> >Why don't you just check for the particular resource you need in every
> >particular case (preferably using autoconf)?
> >
> Because one of the "resources" we're looking for is Debian. Specific 
> example: libtool on regular FreeBSD uses a completely different scheme 
> for soname versions. It uses libfoo.so.1, never libfoo.so.1.0.0, symlink 
> libfoo.so.1 -> libfoo.so.1.0.0 and soname libfoo.so.1, as Linux and most 
> other systems do. On Debian, this needs to be done as Linux does it, 
> because doing the FreeBSD style breaks far too many package build 
> scripts. It breaks virtually every package in fact. Definitely every 
> package using dh_movefiles.
> So what I want libtool to look at is: is this system FreeBSD or Debian 
> GNU/FreeBSD, and do something different depending on the answer.

I don't know much about this, but isn't there an autoconf check
for binary formats and shared library naming?

IMHO making it check for Debian could bring trouble if, say, someday
Debian changes one of these parameters.


Robert Millan

"5 years from now everyone will be running
free GNU on their 200 MIPS, 64M SPARCstation-5"

              Andrew S. Tanenbaum, 30 Jan 1992

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: