Thanks Mike, Just to make things completely confusing...
webconf.lrp is a bunch of shell scripts plus 2 programs compiled for bering-uclibc. So there /is/ a dependency there. However, there are plugins (lwp's) that contain /just/ the 2 binaries. (E.g. Erich Titl's wc207.lwp. It makes webconf.lrp work on his glibc 2.0.7 system.) The plugins overwrite the library specific binaries so that the same shell scripts (in webconf.lrp) can be used with any library. Soo... 1. Does webconf.lrp go in nolibc, and the library specific plugins (wc207.lwp) go in the appropriate directories? 2. Does webconf.lrp and all of the libary specific plugins (wc207.lwp) go in nolibc, since the major part of webconf.lrp is "nolibc", and the plugins are expected to go with it? (I would lean toward this, personally, but it does violate "nolibc" by definition.) 3. REMOVE the uclibc binaries from webconf.lrp and make EVERYONE choose a library specific plugin? (Probably architecturally correct, but it will be a mess trying to support - "I downloaded webconf.lrp and it doesn't work... You have to download your appropriate plugin. ... Which one? there are lots of files in the plugin directory... etc." 4. Leave webconf where it is and wait until the move to FRS Sandbox? 5. Other? This problem /could/ happen with other plugins - Typically a plugin will just be shell code (nolibc), but there's nothing to prevent someone from including a binary in the plugin. On Thursday 07 April 2005 10:31, Mike Noyes wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 04:55, Nathan Angelacos wrote: > > There are two different things in the present webconf cvs repository: > > > > Source code for the core; and I assume that it could go in config (or > > stay under devel/nangel) > > > > binary lrps & lwps; and for the binary "packaged" versions, K.-P. makes a > > good point - the finished packaged stuff should go wherever other > > finished "packaged" stuff goes. > > > > Whatever the group thinks is best is fine with me, but it would be nice > > to have at least the binary packages in an area that others can update. > > > > What do you think of K.-P.'s suggestion? (nolibc) - at least for the > > lwp's > > Nathan > The source code should go in src/config/, and HOWTO belongs in > doc/howto/. > > > The binary packages that aren't dependent on a library go in > bin/nolibc/. > > Note: Our whole bin/ cvs module will probably move to the new SF > FRS SandBox. > > > Please let me know which directories/files you want moved. Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
