On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > On 12-03-19 at 08:59am, Andres Mejia wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Fabian Greffrath >> <fab...@greffrath.com> wrote: >> > Am 19.03.2012 03:59, schrieb Andres Mejia: >> > >> >> Though the build time is increased for libav, ultimately, this >> >> change would be better as the buildd network would not have to cope >> >> with building from two source packages (i.e. setting up and tearing >> >> down for libav and libav-extra for each architecture). Also, in my >> >> opinion, it is easier and less error prone to maintain a single >> >> libav package rather than two of them. >> > >> > >> > I generally agree with your proposal, although "easier and less >> > error-prone" is in the eye of the beholder, of course. At least I am >> > currently a bit lost in your proposed diff against debian/rules. ;) >> > >> > In this context, please remove the libav-source binary package as >> > well. It is of no further use (that I know of) if the libav-extra >> > source package is removed. Also, please make sure that only the >> > dynamic libraries are rebuilt for the extra packages, not the static >> > one (don't know if it is already like this; as I said, the diff is a >> > bit too much for me on a Monday morning ;) ). > >> I think the libav-source package will still be useful. There are >> people who like to activate/deactivate certain features of libav. They >> can use the libav-source package and ensure they have a build with all >> the patches applied for the Debian builds of libav. > > I disagree: That argument would apply for *any* package in Debian. > > Binary packages containing sources is a special construct specifically > for our build system, not needed for direct exposure to our users: Users > who want to recompile packages can much easier do so by forking the > source package. > > > - Jonas > > -- > * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt > * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ > > [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private > > _______________________________________________ > pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list > pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
Yes, after thinking about it, I was going to draw the same conclusion. Since the libav-extra package would no longer be needed, the libav-source package should go away. Users needing a different installation of libav libs can simply download the source package and recompile with whatever options they needed. -- ~ Andres -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
