On 5/18/06, Hisham Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My concern is the maintenance overhead and things going out of sync.
Having *Dependencies files spread around that are 80% similar would be
Not Good. If we're extending the *Dependencies syntax anyway, then why
not have something like this:
Glibc [2.2, )
GTK+ [2.0, )
LibID3Tag [0.15, ) [not arm]
Xorg [6.0, )
PPC-Specific-Stuff [1.0, ) [ppc]
Ok, since the beast is going to be maintained by hand I see no problems on that.
(Didn't think much about the syntax, just lifted it from
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/utils/htop )
BTW, I'm having second thoughts about the "math-interval" way of
specifying ranges. Maybe the plain old ">=" would be more natural
looking, and some books write half-open intervals as "[2,2, [" anyway.
">=" looks fine too. Just a matter of asking contributers and other
developers about their preferred method, I think.
I noticed some unnecessary copy-and-paste in the $ARCH/Recipe files; I
don't remember if we already talked about this. Avoid moving non-i686
specific stuff into i686/Recipe just to factor out options between
architectures.
(...)
Good:
Recipe:
configure_options=(
--flag1
--flag2
--flag3
)
arm/Recipe:
configure_options=(
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
--flag4-for-arm
)
sh/Recipe:
configure_options=(
--tiny
)
Ouch, much better. I recall having tried to use
[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the past but I probably did some typo, as
it didn't work at the time. Thanks for the suggestions, I'll give a
review on the cross recipes here.
--
Lucas
powered by /dev/dsp
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
