Re: App-specific libraries (was: Re: Bug#218868: ITP: gphpedit -- PHP/HTML/CSS editor with syntax checking)

[Jonathan Oxer <jon@ivt.com.au>]

On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 10:29, Matthew Palmer wrote:

> If the patches would be of general use, I'd try and get them incorporated
> into the Debian package for scintilla, even if upstream won't take them

Good point, I'll look at this.

> (I'd
> try and work out amongst those involved *why* it's not being accepted
> upstream).

AFAIK the gPHPEdit developer has been trying to get it included for a
while (IIRC there are bugs in upstream GtkScintilla WRT mouse scroll
events) and isn't getting anywhere. I doubt my intervention in the
situation will help, although it's worth a try.

> otherwise breaks normal function), then it's time to consider static
> linking.  I don't know if the patched version of scintilla is included with
> upstream's sources for gPHPEdit, but if it is, you're home free.  If not,
> you'll have to fudge it into the source package somehow - by giant diff or
> rebuilding the source package, whichever you think will be better.

The patched GtkScintilla is distributed "with" gPHPEdit, but as a
separate tarball. The instructions for gPHPEdit say to build and install
the patched GtkScintilla first. From a purely packaging POV it would be
much cleaner to make 2 packages rather than have to merge the
GtkScintilla build into each version of the gPHPEdit package, but...

> Before all the shared object people kill me, if it's only going to be of
> practical use to this one application, archive space will be saved by *not*
> making a separate library package.  Scream "slippery slope" all you like.

I absolutely agree. That's why I've been pondering the best approach, I
really don't want to add a whole extra package just for this since it'd
be unlikely to be used by anything else.

Thanks for the suggestions Matt.

Cheers  :-)

Jonathan