[XForms] Re: [PATCH] Simplify configure.ac
Peter S Galbraith
psg at debian.org
Wed Sep 10 13:25:38 EDT 2003
Angus Leeming <angus.leeming at btopenworld.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 September 2003 5:02 pm, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > To subscribers of the xforms list
> > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <Jean-Marc.Lasgouttes at inria.fr> wrote:
> > > support would mean that applications like LyX would depend on GL
> > > support, which is stupid. An alternative would be to make separate
> > > xforms and xforms-gl rpms, but this is a bit heavy IMO.
> > This is what I do for Debian anyway:
> > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/libs/libforms1.html
> > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/libs/libformsgl1.html
> > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/libdevel/libforms-dev.html
> > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/libformsgl-dev.html
> > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/libforms-bin.html
> Any reason why you don't split up xforms and xforms-image?
Only because the image library didn't cause the added depencies to be
too onerous. Most users already have installed the packages for
libjpeg, libtiff and libXpm. OpenGL is another story, so I bundled it
> Is making dep packages automatically just a case of adding the correct
> Makefile target and leaving the computer to do its stuff? If so, feel
> free to submit a patch.
Making Debian packages involves a debian/ directory. See
for what I add/change from the original tar ball. It's not a huge deal
for me to keep this separate and apply it after your release, and I
suppose having an outdated debian directory can sometimes cause
problems. I include it in CVS for projects that I'm heavily involved
with (gri and MH-E) and have CVS access, and don't do it in the majority
of my packages (because I don't track CVS as much as would be required).
Making the actual packages also involves doing it on a Debian system,
of course, since specific tools are required to calculate dependencies
and certain helper packages are invoked.
More information about the Xforms