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

Should I split off arch independant part?

The untimate source of my project is a windows programer who GPLed. He thought 
it would be a good idea to write the documentation in windows word .doc file! 
Bad move.

The only free program that I can find to convert this document source to a 
civilized format is unoconv together with libreoffice-writer. In the opensuse 
world loconvert also works. But it also uses libreoffice-writer.

I have spent more packager time on building this documentation than building 
the libarary.

It has been suggested that I split off the build process so that the 
archetecture dependant parts of the program can be built without building the 
documentation each time.

> Given
> that the documentation winds up in a separate architecture-independent
> binary package anyway, I'd suggest arranging to build it only in full
> builds, which presumably run in less restrictive environments.
> (Relatedly, I'd suggest moving unoconv from Build-Depends to
> Build-Depends-Indep.)

This web page
with the confidence inspiring title "Asylum Diaries of a Madman" suggests a 
workaround whereby this my be accomplished.

However the method feels kludgy, counterintuitive, and difficult to understand, 
and therefore difficult to maintain. It also relies on hairsplitting to remain 
within the rules.

I feel that computer time is much cheaper that human time.

Should methods be used to split off the arch indpendant part? What do the true 
experts think?

Paul Elliott                               1(512)837-1096
pelliott@BlackPatchPanel.com               PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J
http://www.free.blackpatchpanel.com/pme/   Austin TX 78758-3117

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: