Re: RFS: opencpn
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Anton Martchukov <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Btw, I noted that most of the packages supply icons to
> /usr/share/pixmaps, but some less amount to /usr/share/icons
> like in case with OpenCPN. Is there any difference between
> those folders, maybe it's better to fix Makefile to install
> icons to pixmaps rather than icons?
/usr/share/icons is better because you can install multiple images of
different sizes. You can also install SVG icons there. You can also
have different icons for different icon themes and so on.
>> Generally it isn't a good idea to patch Makefile.in without patching
>> Makefile.am, what is the reason for that?
> That's because I use configure supplied in tarball to build
> the package. I am going to submit patches for Makefile.am to
> upstream, so in next release we will have clean Maefiles our
> of the box.
> Could add patches to Makefile.am to the quilt too.
I think it would be a good idea, you never know who will look at your
patches and use them blindly.
>> Upstream should use automake's 'make distcheck' to create tarballs for
>> distribution, best teach them about it.
> I'll let them know. So far is it critical to make some hacking
> on the package level itself?
>From the lintian tag info it sounds like it is worth it. You'll want
to remove the files on clean and before ./configure is run.