Re: Newbie questions on packaging opencpn
Hi!
Found some time again...
On 06/09/18 09:02, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 9/5/18 5:41 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> On 9/5/18 5:26 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
>>> Isn't a library so-file without visible symbols terribly wrong?
>>
>> Yes, that implies that no methods are exported which can be used by
>> other programs, defeating the purpose of being a shared library.
>
> The CMakeLists.txt hides all symbols by default:
>
> set_target_properties(unarr PROPERTIES
> PUBLIC_HEADER unarr.h
> C_VISIBILITY_PRESET hidden
> C_STANDARD 99
> C_STANDARD_REQUIRED ON
> DEFINE_SYMBOL UNARR_EXPORT_SYMBOLS
> VERSION ${PROJECT_VERSION}
> SOVERSION ${PROJECT_VERSION_MAJOR})
>
>
> But the symbols in the unarr.h public header aren't made visible. That
> should probably be fixed. Then the symbols file can be used to generate
> dependencies on libunarr1 based on the symbols used and the version of
> the library they were introduced in.
>
Right, thanks for spotting!
Fixed
On 05/09/18 14:47, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
> On 9/5/18 10:05 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
>> On 05/09/18 09:39, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> My gut feeling still is that using get-orig-source and consistent lf
>> line ends is a better option than wading into a mess of inconsistent
>> line endings. That said, I'm a newbie, I could try to walk this path.
>> However, this means reworking large parts of my setup, and I question
>> the value. It will considerably delay my work.
>
> What reworking do you need? Switching from the get-orig-source target to
> uscan should be trivial.
>
> I also don't understand why you're so hung up on the line ending, it
> shouldn't really matter which is used.
Fixed, sort of. I have the watch file, and use uscan in get-orig-source.
And yes, I have get-orig-source and am prepared to defend that decision.
Things like git, my editor and command line tools all carries needs for
specific setup when using non-lf line endings. Or just just risks of
surprises. While I certainly could get this running with the original
crlf with some effort, I just don't want to have this hanging over me
(or anyone else) when it comes to maintenance months or years later.
Cheers!
--alec
Reply to: