glest package - an analysis

[Giuseppe Borzi]

Hello Eddy,
sorry for the delay in the answer, I had been busy with my work.

>
> Nice, I guess we could build that after we make glest work properly.

Ok, I have (re)downloaded glest editor sources from sourceforge CVS.
They are 10 months old (i.e. they are the same files I made the patch
for), so the patch should apply without problems.

>
> :-) Heh, the changes in SVN are only the parts which diverge from the
> original package, thus the debian directory will always be there while I
> chose to modify immediately at source package unpacking. In other words,
> the part in SVN will overwrite the unpacked orig tarball. It is meant to
> be handled via svn-buildpackage[0].
>
> I have added that rule, but the main issue is that the package must be
> configured in order to have the clean rule available, so now the clean
> target depends on the configure target.

Now I understand. I got confused looking at the original package and at
your modifications with meld. GUI are not always so intuitive.

>
> Second major change was to bootstrap the package (autotools) statically,
> and not during the build process. This *is* a good thing because the
> autotools might be broken on some arches, also there are lots of subtle
> issues (see Sam Hocevar's talk on autotools during the Debian QA meeting
> in Darmstaadt[1]) which are avoided this way.

Thanks, that presentation was revealing. BTW, before knowing it, I was
thinking about the following problem for glest or any other package
using automake. I put automake 1.9 among the Build-depends and obviously
on my system it is the default automake to be used. What can happen if
someone with automake 1.9 and automake 1.x (x != 9) installed, but with
the default automake to use set to 1.x, tries to rebuild the package
from source ? There won't be an error message about a missing
requirement (that should be "your automake alternative must be 1.9") and
the compilation can go wrong.

>
> [after looking at the console] YAY! The package just built in the chroot
> (and a small change in the debian/rules file) GREAT!

OK. I'll try it after putting "edgy" instead of "UNRELEASED" in changelog.

>
> Sure :-)
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/Subversion and
> http://wiki.debian.org/SmallSVNTutorial

Thanks, after reading the Small tutorial I realized I need to read the
manual.

Regards.
-- 
Giuseppe Borzi'

e-mail: gborzi at ieee.org
http://www.webalice.it/gborzi1/
Assistant Professor at the Univ. of Messina - Italia
----------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/attachments/20060921/87632be8/signature.pgp