On 23-Jun-2005, David Given wrote: > I suspect that the only way to cleanly package this for Debian (and > for most other architectures) would be to split it up into (a) > tools, (b) code generators, (c) compilers, (d) libraries. Each one > would be a different Debian package and build and install seperately > (but possibly from the same source package). That seems the sensible route to take. There doesn't seem to be a cyclic dependency in what you've described. > This does mean that building it all in one pass would be tricky, > though. Smaller pieces are easier to test (or at least, to build tests for). Building in one pass isn't a requirement. An auto-builder will take care of the series of steps needed to build dependencies and install them, so long as the individual packages support this. A meta-package can, of course, be written to allow an end-user to easily install all these related packages as one action. -- \ "I like to fill my bathtub up with water, then turn the shower | `\ on and pretend I'm in a submarine that's been hit." -- Steven | _o__) Wright | Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature