2009/5/18 Gunnar Wolf <[email protected]>: > Antonio, please feel free to browse the way we are splitting the > binaries for the Debian packages generation [1] (you want to look at > debian/control and debian/rules). Cherokee does a very good work at > being modular, and all the code that depends on those libraries is > cleanly separated at their specific plugins, allowing us to create > separate packages depending on each of them.
Thanks Gunnar, I'll have a look. > I know ports follow a quite different philosophy than binary packages, > as they usually are compiled locally (do you also manage binary ports > in OSX as you do in some BSDs?), and you can rather adjust compiler > flags to omit some build options - of course, dropping said > dependencies. Possibly the Debian packaging way would be the way to go > for Fink. But anyway, I am unaware on whether it is still widely used. I'm afraid I never was into BSD or Gentoo so my experience with BSD-style ports is very limited but I'm researching a bit and of course know some people to ask for advice. I don't really know at this point how powerful MacPorts is in this regard but for know it looks like a matter of adjusting the settings for the default build and creating all other options as variants. I'll be looking into that the following days as well as sharing the ports somewhere like BitBucket or Github. Antonio _______________________________________________ Cherokee mailing list [email protected] http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
