On Wed, 7 Jul 2010 13:46:20 +0300
Marko Lindqvist <cazf...@gmail.com> wrote:

(Are those in CC on the list? if so feel free to drop them from the
explicit list).

> On 4 July 2010 10:29, Karl Goetz <no-reply.invalid-addr...@gna.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I personally built debian packets during S2_2 development cycle to
> >> test libfreeciv as shared library in system directory and I want
> >
> > is libfreeciv a new part of freeciv?
>  It's part common to both server and client. Previously it was always
> built as static library (named libcommon back then) and linked to all
> binaries. Now we use libtool, and libfreeciv can be optionally built
> as shared library.

Ah, that sounds nice. Certainly something we (debian) should be looking

> >> date with build system changes and improvements and downstream
> >> could check those changes and make updates to their files
> >> accordingly.
> >
> > Would you be interested in packaging (debian/ dir) suggestions from
> > debian?
> I do download debian source package every now and then to check if you
> have something we would want to take back to upstream. But of course
> we listen any other suggestions as well :-)

If you have it under control i won't push our way of doing things on
you :)

> > Would you be willing to ship your debian/ dir as an example.debian
> > (or similar name), or do you prefer to leave it as debian?
>  Well... I guess it servers our users better if we leave it as debian.
> So it's ready for use for those who want to export latest development
> version from our svn and build debian packets. Those building Debian
> debian packets will use your debian dir anyway.

Good point.

> >> Big build system changes between S2_1 and S2_2 that may affect
> >> distributions are possibility to build libfreeciv as shared library
> >> and possibility to build multiple clients at once. Our debian build
> >> files take advantage both of those features.
> >
> > I'll definitely have another look at the shipped debian dir,
> > because I was wondering how sane it would be to switch to the code
> > for building multiple clients in a single run.
>  One of the reasons we implemented this building multiple clients in a
> single run was that some other distribution asked for it. Second

Interesting. I did look at the ticket for the building all clients at
once, but don't recall that detail.

> reason was that we (or at least I) want to more easily test during
> development that some patch is not breaking build for *any* client.

Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
No, I won't join your social networking group

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Freeciv-dev mailing list

Reply via email to