Re: Interested in adopting the premake package
On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> First of all, thanks for volunteering to package and maintain
> premake4! One of my packages (0ad) actually uses an embedded copy of
> premake, which I would like to switch to using a system version if
> possible, but of course premake4 isn't yet available in Debian...
Why is 0ad upstream embedding premake4?
Wow, premake4 itself embeds a copy of lua.
> Premake4 is backwards incompatible with earlier versions, which is why
> upstream renamed the binary. It also looks for a different input file
> (premake4.lua instead of premake.lua, in the same sense that cmake
> looks for CMakeLists.txt and scons looks for Sconstruct in the current
> In light of this, I suggest having two separate source packages, i.e.
> src:premake and src:premake4. I say "suggest" instead of something
> stronger because a) no package currently in the archive build-depends
> on premake, so nothing's going to FTBFS, and b) I don't know if
> upstream even maintains the older 3.x version anymore.
I would also suggest to upload premake 4 as source premake4 and binary
premake4, probably before wheezy is released. The premake
source/binary packages can be removed after the release or later if
> According to build-rdeps, none. Presumably because there are packages
> like 0ad which use an embedded copy of premake. (That, or because
> premake is nowhere as popular as e.g. cmake or scons.)
According to apt-file -a source search premake:
cegui-mk has a bunch of stuff for premake 3.
liblo, p7zip and p7zip-rar have a premake4.lua
nyquist and ode embed premake4.exe (WTF?) and have a premake4.lua
wxsqlite3 has premake/wxwidgets.lua