Re: Updating the fis-gtm package to V6.1-000
Hi Andreas,
On 09/11/14 16:46, Andreas Tille wrote:
Hi Amul,
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:30:18PM -0400, Amul Shah wrote:
[amul:7] To manage the default "current" link, /opt/fis-gtm/current,
debian/rules includes a override_dh_link target. We would like to
let users install GT.M version 6.0-003 and V6.1-000 concurrently.
Any ideas on achieving a "current" link without using a
postinst/prerm script?
I do not see why it should be a goal to avoid postinst/prerm scripts. I
personally have not dealt with similar problems but if I would need to I
would have a look how openjdk, python or gcc are solving this issue. In
any case you can always consult debian-mentors@lists.debian.org if you
might face problems to apply the technique used in these packages for
fis-gtm.
[amul:8] Since V6.2-000 was just release, I'm skipping this feature for the V6.1-000 package.
[amul:7] To install both 32bit and 64it versions of GT.M on the same
machine, we are considering going with two separate packages or
multiarch. What are your thoughts on separate packages vs multiarch?
If I read everything correctly, the ia32-libs model is being
replaced with multiarch.
Multiarch is the way to go.
[amul:8] I implemented this option. I was surprised by how little work was actually required.
[amul:8] Could you look over my work when you have some time. Everything works as I think it should, which means the work is
only as good as I think. ;) I think that we are ready to upload V6.1-000.
[amul:8] I hope to get the V6.2-000 packing done by the end of the month. I know this will result in overlapping packages, but I
would very much like to have the work for V6.1-000 result in a package.
thanks,
Amul
_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
Reply to: