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

Re: Connecting those interested in getting GT.M intotheDebianrepositories



Hi Andreas,

I'm happy to see that this discussion is continuing, and I'm still interested in finding a way to get this package built. I'm currently doing some digging to see if I can find a way to do it. Since I'm sailing in uncharted water (at least not charted by myself :) ,it's difficult to predict the outcome, but I just wanted to say that I'm still "on the job." As I discover things that are worth sharing or find questions for which I think you may know the answer, I'll surely be in touch.

Alan

On 09/08/2010 01:50 AM, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Tue, Sep 07, 2010 at 04:51:48PM -0400, K.S. Bhaskar wrote:
IMHO as long as you are dealing with peoples names you always have to
respect non-ASCII characters even in pure English environments.
[KSB] In the United States, it is common to pretend that there are no
non-ASCII characters in names.
So a lot of immigrants are not spelled properly ... hmmm.

There are only "Build-Depends" (and no Build-Recommends) - so this is
simple.
[KSB] I am a little confused as to what this means in practice.  Building
GT.M will require ICU (libicu-dev), but this is so that the binaries can
use ICU if it is installed.  Running GT.M does not require ICU unless an
application wants to use UTF-8.
If you Build-Depend to libicu-dev and it happens that some binary file
in the resulting binary package depends from symbols provided in libicu*
then the control file variable

    Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}

will be expanded apropriately by the package building tools
automatically.  Only if libicu* provides stuff which can not be
automatically detected (and thus is not required) you need to mention it
explicitely and thus have a choice between Recommends and Depends.  So
most probably the discussion about this is moot anyway because the
packaging tools are supposed to handle this properly anyway.

Kind regards

      Andreas.



Reply to: