On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 06:32, Dan S <[email protected]> wrote: > 2010/11/3 Felipe Sateler <[email protected]>: >> 2010/11/2 Dan S <[email protected]>: >>> 2010/10/31 Felipe Sateler <[email protected]>: >>>> Артём, you are CCed because I don't know if you are subscribed to the list. >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:09, Dan S <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> 2010/10/6 Felipe Sateler <[email protected]>: >>>>> > Hi all, (Dan CCed because I'm not sure if you are subscribed to the >>>>> > list) >>>>> > >>>>> > I managed to take a few minutes to take a look at the package and it is >>>>> > not in a very good shape (it was still using simple-patchsys!). I have >>>>> > worked a bit on it, but it still has a long way to go. I will try to >>>>> > work on it during this week, I think I can find one hour or two. >>>>> > >>>>> > Dan, as you are part of upstream, could you comment on the patches >>>>> > included in the packaging? I can see they are in upstream svn ubuntu >>>>> > packaging module, with yourself as last commiter on most of them. They >>>>> > are older than the latest sc release, though. >>>>> >>>>> Hi - sorry for slow reply, I missed this thread. Most of the patches >>>>> are by other people but I will try to comment: >>>>> >>>>> 02_disable_elisp_compilation.diff >>>>> - not sure I'm afraid, it's connected with the emacs sc3 mode, which >>>>> I don't use. Looks like it might disable something from running simply >>>>> because the build machine isn't the target machine. >>>>> >>>>> 03_fix_elisp_install_path.diff >>>>> - another emacs mode thing, not sure. >>>> >>>> Does anyone use emacs and can comment on wether this should be applied >>>> upstream? The patch changes the elisp install path from >>>> /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp to /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/supercollider >>>> >>>>> >>>>> 06_deb_scvim.diff >>>>> - build machine != target machine so don't error out if no ruby >>>>> executable >>>>> >>>>> 07_deb_sced.diff >>>>> - build machine != target machine so don't modify machine's mime database >>>> >>>> Dan, can you comment on whether these can be upstreamed? I don't see >>>> why they should be debian-specific. >>> >>> Right, that makes sense. I've had a look at the scons scripts and not >>> been able to integrate them in neatly (was hoping to add a nice option >>> for not-installing-here - if anyone has the scons chops to suggest >>> something then please do, I'd be grateful.) >> >> Can't do it, at least for the time being. > > np. In the medium-term, upstream is moving from scons to cmake; the > build scripts will hopefully be less quirky!
cmake does this automatically: rpath is used when building, but it is stripped at install time. > > >>> FYI, supercollider 3.4.1 (bugfix release) has just been agreed, so is >>> likely to come out very very soon without any further upstreaming. I >>> hope that doesn't get in the way of debianising... would these patches >>> be considered blocking issues, do you think? >> >> I'm not quite sure what you mean. If you mean that the patches are not >> likely to be upstreamed before that, then it is no problem, we can >> continue with the patches. > > Yes, that's what I meant, thanks. Just making sure I get the flow > right, don't miss out anything I should be doing. Don't worry. By the way, the package needs to get the SONAME issue right, does upstream have a stance on this? -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
