cctbx debian package
> I know I'd prefer autotools too. Scons is not so bad too. It has some good ideas
> but it's a long way to become a drop in replacement for autotools. Maybe in a
> few years it'll be ready. I was searching for shlib versioning and people are
> complaining about it since 2008 and also sended patches upstream but nothing
> changed since.
In that case you need to polish your patches :)
Once we will have something working we will rewaork the patch series until we find
it acceptable and minimalist
> Could have been a good choice back then but I'm at this point where I put so much effort
> into Scons and read so much source code that I don't want to give it up. And to
> be honest I have way more experience in python then anything else.
this is not an issue :)
> But I solved the problem with the symlinks. I created LibtoolInstall() Builder.
> I guess when I'm finished with all I'm gonna have to contribute my libtool
> builders to the scons community.
at the end they will have a sort of Libtool :))
> Some other questions. There are packages like libscitbx0 where I put
> libscitbx.so and libscitbx_boost_python-py**.so in it. I saw the lintian complains and
> I wonder if I should pack them seperately. Meaning:
ususally this is the preferred solution.
thoses libscitbx_boost_python0 libraries are not python extensions ?
> I was also thinking about the dispatcher scripts. Most of them seem useless to
> me. All scripts ending *.python are just calling the interpreter with the proper
> pythonpaths what is useless.
> The other scripts especially boost.* cbflib.* etc would just
> pollute the namespace in /usr/bin. People could be confused. We could put them
> in a seperate package and don't put the files into /usr/bin but for example
> /usr/share/cctbx/bin. What is your opinion on that?
The only general concern I have with this is that third party software which use cctbx
will rely on these scripts. Another important point is that each /usr/bin/xxx should
have it's dedicated man pages...
Do you know about third party softwares which use cctbx via the scripts ?
We can in that case provide a cctbx-legacy with all thoses "useless" scripts.
Can you put on the wiki more information about theses scripts so it willbe possible to sort them in different categories ?