On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 06:09:03PM +0200, Enrico Zini wrote:
> The original distribution features an own packaging system, which was
> good when it was made, but now it's a bit tricky to work with. To make
> it easy package CNF for Debian and Fedora, I skipped part of the
> original packaging and created a new makefile which wraps the old one
> providing a more usual behaviour.
I now reread this mail [1] from Nick Barkas and realised that some
autotools packaging effort was started. However, browsing at the
website I get the impression that those are nightly builds from CVS, and
the stable versions are still packaged with the old system. And, still
as I understand it, the project was terminated before the
autotools-based code was released, and that work has been frozen as a
nightly build.
I can now do one of three things:
1) go on with my package, which has the stable version with a somehow
fixed build system;
2) backport their autotools-based build system to the stable version;
3) package the CVS nightly build.
At the moment my preferred option would be to go with my package, for
two reasons: 1. because it's already done and ready to be uploaded and
I'm lazy :) and 2. because it's a way to package the stable version
with as little changes as possible.
Someone with more insight on starlink's situation can still easily
change my mind, though :)
Ciao,
Enrico
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2006/02/msg00020.html
[2] http://dev.starlink.ac.uk/build/DEBIAN-3.0r3_i386/dist/
--
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature