Re: Better to run multiple configure/make cycles or use separate sources?
Am Montag, 19. Februar 2007 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 05:53:44PM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote:
> > Hi List!
> >
> > I'm packaging a program which offers different options in using different
> > compile options.
> >
> > My wish is to provide different binary-packages in the end.
> >
> > What should be done?
> > Should I prepare the 'rules' to do different compilations with
> > different 'configures' and separate the files with *.install files
> > afterwards
>
> You'll probably want to run "clean" too.
True?
> > or should I prepare separate sources each with it's own unique 'rules'
> > doing just one compile and building only one binary each?
>
> This has considerably more duplication of effort and is more error prone
> than the first option.
Thx for telling me that maintaining multiple source-packages is more work!
> > If the first, where can I find appropriate How-Tos?
>
> I believe devref points to vim as an example of a multiple binary
> package, with multiple compiles of the same thing.
Thx ... I googled this myself! But just looking over a complex 'rules' like we
have in vim does not help very much!
Let's ask different:
I'm able to do differnet compiles and install (using 'make install') the whole
program (including pos, themes, docs, binaries, etc.) into subdirs beneath
debian ..
debian/compiled-version1
debian/compiled-version2
debian/compiled-version3
What I want now is to put only the binaries in the different flavour-deb's and
all the common rest in a common.deb.
How would I do that? Just not use upstream's 'make install' and use dh_install
together with flavour.install files in debian?
Thus would mean, I have to re-do all what is done in upstream's Makefile by
hand in 'rules' !?
So ... I do have 3 subdirs under debian containing 3 complete installs with
different flavours.
How do I part them up into 3 flavour.debs and 1 common.deb?
Lg
Roman
Reply to: