Thoughts on pd object packaging - use of cdbs might be preferable?

[IOhannes m zmoelnig]

On 2010-11-11 09:09, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

>>>
>>> include /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/standard-pd-object.mk
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>
>> That looks very handy, but I think the given library template is well
>> tuned.  

well, i think the template library Makefile fails on the the kfreebsd
and hurd platforms (at least according to the build logs).

i understand that these platforms are not the main targets, but since we
are on debian, there is no good reason to not include them.

a common makefile snippet could help a lot (also on debian-derivatives
that have x86 derived architectures (e.g. i686), that could benefit from
enabling optimzations globally (think SIMD))


<sidenote>
the above looks a bit ironic to me...
within the pd-community i guess that i was (and am) one of the stronger
advocates of self-contained build-systems (there has been loads of
discussion on whether it is better to use a single Makefile for all (or
most) libraries or whether each library should have there own cloned
makefile.
the "library template Makefile" is basically the outcome of the latter,
and allows each library to build without having to download the entire
repository.

however, i think that those problems mainly arose because there is no
way to define build-dependency in a cross-platform way for ordinary
Pd-packages.
since now we are in the good position that we are talking about debian,
we actually have the possibility to use build-dependencies and i don't
see a reason to not do that.
</sidenote>


>For me the problem would be then learning cdbs for special
>> cases.  But since there are still at least 30 unpackaged Pd libraries, I
>> think having this as option makes sense. I'd call it something like
>> standard-pd-library.mk

well, one practical problem would obviously be, that there currently is
no "puredata-dev" package yet, and it is unlikely to come before the
upstream release of Pd-0.43 (which was due in august, but was delayed
since then).

would it make sense to create a separate package (e.g.
"puredata-debian-dev") for the sole purpose of centralizing the makefile
snippets?

this package could then include cdbs, dh,... so people could have their
pick.


fgmasdr
IOhannes

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3636 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20101111/3ab24d63/attachment.bin>