Re: Ogon packaging for Debian (was: Re: Bug#906072: Ogon packages available (Linux RDP Server))

[marcel@linux-ng.de]

Hi Mike,

June 22, 2020 5:09 PM, "Mike Gabriel" <mike.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de> wrote:

...
>> I have changed the version from 1.0.1~git... to 1.0.0+git.... (the
>> upstream release number is not our realm, it's upstream's). I haven't
>> committed + pushed this, yet:
...
>> Ok, just let me know wether you'd like to commit the changes, or if I should do that.
> 
> Please commit my changes above. Thanks.

All packages are now named with "+" and the "get-orig-source" part was added to debian/rules (committed and pushed).

>> Basically what I did was:
>> - Prefixing binaries with "ogon-"
>> - Adding some extra "*ogon*" to "lib*.so*" (if possible)
>> - Moving (include/library) paths to something containing "*ogon*"
>> 
>> Is that an acceptable way?
> 
> Yes and know. Are you saying that upstream does not support installing to a proper DESTDIR? The way
> to go here is basically as you describe. But ideally using upstream patches, not some hacks in
> d/rules. Let me know if you need help with this...

There's support for installing in DESTDIR.
However as most packages are forks of mainstream projects (libxfont, pulseaudio, weston, x-backend, there's a lot of potential for conflict with existing packages when installed to /usr (that's why I put them into /opt instead).

@Bernhard: It'd be nice to know if patches that allow an installation to /usr (without conflicts) would be merged in the original git tree (preferred way of handling such a situation, if I understood Mike correctly).

So basically my next steps will be to get a working package set relocated to /usr, and fix packaging issues on the way (or afterwards).

Let me know if that's not the best way to go.

Bye,
  Marcel