moving autopackage into cvs
Now that I have finally built an autopackage, I think it would be best to move the autopackage configuration into cvs and work on it from there.
By default autopackage expects to find /cvsroot/inkscape/autopackage. But it should also work with /cvsroot/inkscape/packaging/autopackage if makeinstaller is run with the path as an additional parameter.
Are there any opinions as to whether or not I should add this and where it should go?
Mike walked me through some changes to configure.ac, in order to get the autopackage to build.
http://www.ekips.org/comp/inkscape/inx/autopackage.diff
As I understand some of those changes are just temporary tweaks. Could someone please comment on the significance of these changes? Is there a way to merge this with CVS without breaking anything?
Aaron Spike
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 02:04:59PM -0500, aaron@...749... wrote:
Now that I have finally built an autopackage, I think it would be best to move the autopackage configuration into cvs and work on it from there.
By default autopackage expects to find /cvsroot/inkscape/autopackage. But it should also work with /cvsroot/inkscape/packaging/autopackage if makeinstaller is run with the path as an additional parameter.
Are there any opinions as to whether or not I should add this and where it should go?
I think it's a good idea to add it, and if you can fit it into the packaging/ subdir that would be ideal.
Mike walked me through some changes to configure.ac, in order to get the autopackage to build.
http://www.ekips.org/comp/inkscape/inx/autopackage.diff
As I understand some of those changes are just temporary tweaks. Could someone please comment on the significance of these changes? Is there a way to merge this with CVS without breaking anything?
Looks like it disables GTKSPELL and adds a check for gthread, then adds autopackage/default.apspec as a recognized generated file.
The second two changes look fine, but I'm curious about why GtkSpell would need to be disabled?
Bryce
Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 02:04:59PM -0500, aaron@...749... wrote:
Are there any opinions as to whether or not I should add this and where it should go?
I think it's a good idea to add it, and if you can fit it into the packaging/ subdir that would be ideal.
As I understand some of those changes are just temporary tweaks. Could someone please comment on the significance of these changes? Is there a way to merge this with CVS without breaking anything?
Looks like it disables GTKSPELL and adds a check for gthread, then adds autopackage/default.apspec as a recognized generated file.
The second two changes look fine, but I'm curious about why GtkSpell would need to be disabled?
As I understand disabling GTKSPELL is only a temporary problem, that will be fixed by autopackage 1.2, which is due out in a month or so. I believe the problem is that rather than being a dependency, it should just be used if it is available. (I'm just repeating what I've heard from Mike as best I can.)
So as soon as I learn how I will add the autopackage directory under packaging and commit the second two changes.
Do you think it is worth the trouble to try to write a switch for GTKSPELL until it can be properly fixed?
Aaron Spike
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 06:45:00PM -0500, aaron@...749... wrote:
The second two changes look fine, but I'm curious about why GtkSpell would need to be disabled?
As I understand disabling GTKSPELL is only a temporary problem, that will be fixed by autopackage 1.2, which is due out in a month or so. I believe the problem is that rather than being a dependency, it should just be used if it is available. (I'm just repeating what I've heard from Mike as best I can.)
So as soon as I learn how I will add the autopackage directory under packaging and commit the second two changes.
Do you think it is worth the trouble to try to write a switch for GTKSPELL until it can be properly fixed?
Yeah, probably. Inkscape is most likely going to hit its release within a month, so if it'll take autopackager more time than that to get a proper fix, it would be best to do what's needed to ensure gtkspell is still available.
Bryce
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:08:41 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
The second two changes look fine, but I'm curious about why GtkSpell would need to be disabled?
I just haven't written the patch to make it weak linked yet. Also, on some configurations bugs in GCC can cause Inkscape to crash when using gtkspell - autopackage 1.2 contains workarounds for these GCC bugs but it would not be safe to enable gtkspell whilst Inkscape uses autopackage 1.0.
I'll deal with this one myself when we're ready ... for now it should just be disabled for the autopackage build.
thanks -mike
participants (3)
-
unknown＠example.com -
Bryce Harrington -
Mike Hearn