On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 11:49:09PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
AK I have not packaged libraries yet, and I'm going to do. What is the easyest
AK way to start?
Take a diff file from a lib package (maybe libgdk-pixbuf2) and see how this
work.
of course I did so. But I want to know
Alexander Kotelnikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I want to know where it is written about what should go to -dev
package, and what to the library one.
/usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch4.html#s4.3
/usr/share/doc/packaging-manual/packaging.html/ch-sharedlibs.html
--
Colin Watson
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Richter" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Frederico S. Muñoz" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 6:22 AM
Subject: Re: Trying to begin
On 9 Oct 2000, Frederico S. Muñoz wrote:
Having said that, I would like to know if
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
Hi,
is it possible to get bugreports of a package automatically forwarded/copied
upstream? The author of one of my packages wants that (without being the
maintainer himself).
Use your procmail/maildrop to do it. :)
--
Moin,
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 02:37:02PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
is it possible to get bugreports of a package automatically forwarded/copied
upstream? The author of one of my packages wants that (without being the
maintainer himself).
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Yves Arrouye wrote:
Any well-known trick to compile the .c twice w/o changing too much of the
original package? For example, does it make sense to configure in two
different locations, once with --enable-shared and once with
--enable-static, for example? Do we have an
Any well-known trick to compile the .c twice w/o changing
too much of the
original package? For example, does it make sense to
configure in two
different locations, once with --enable-shared and once with
--enable-static, for example? Do we have an example of a
small library that
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Yves Arrouye wrote:
[Compiling a library, --enable-shared and --enable-static]
"All libraries must have a shared version in the lib package and a static
version in the lib-dev package. The shared version must be compiled with
-fPIC, and the static version must not be. In
On 20001009T214211+0200, Simon Richter wrote:
.static.o is bad because it is not portable to other compilers.
Um, what compilers do not allow the user to specify the input/output
file name?
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
.static.o is bad because it is not portable to other compilers.
Um, what compilers do not allow the user to specify the input/output
file name?
There are some strange commercial compilers out there that have this
problem. Since this is the
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Yves Arrouye wrote:
[.static.o]
Do you mean that non-gcc compilers won't obey -o at the same time as -c?
Possibly.
I don't use libtool because libtool has problems when gcc is used with the
platform's ld on Solaris for example: static initializers aren't called.
Does
On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 11:49:09PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
AK I have not packaged libraries yet, and I'm going to do. What is the
easyest
AK way to start?
Take a diff file from a lib package (maybe libgdk-pixbuf2) and see how this
work.
of course I did so. But I want to know
Alexander Kotelnikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I want to know where it is written about what should go to -dev
package, and what to the library one.
/usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch4.html#s4.3
/usr/share/doc/packaging-manual/packaging.html/ch-sharedlibs.html
--
Colin Watson
- Original Message -
From: Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Frederico S. Muñoz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 6:22 AM
Subject: Re: Trying to begin
On 9 Oct 2000, Frederico S. Muñoz wrote:
Having said that, I would like to know
Hi,
is it possible to get bugreports of a package automatically forwarded/copied
upstream? The author of one of my packages wants that (without being the
maintainer himself).
Christian
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
Hi,
is it possible to get bugreports of a package automatically forwarded/copied
upstream? The author of one of my packages wants that (without being the
maintainer himself).
Use your procmail/maildrop to do it. :)
--
Moin,
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 02:37:02PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
is it possible to get bugreports of a package automatically forwarded/copied
upstream? The author of one of my packages wants that (without being the
maintainer himself).
On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 07:43:35AM -0500, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
Procmail sounds good, but I use procmail only on my machine, and bug reports
end on a debian machine and I do not intend to change that (yet).
Ah, your mail to debian.org address is not forwarded all to another
address? If
Alexander Kotelnikov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I want to know where it is written about what should go to -dev
package, and what to the library one.
/usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch4.html#s4.3
/usr/share/doc/packaging-manual/packaging.html/ch-sharedlibs.html
Any
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Yves Arrouye wrote:
Any well-known trick to compile the .c twice w/o changing too much of the
original package? For example, does it make sense to configure in two
different locations, once with --enable-shared and once with
--enable-static, for example? Do we have an
Any well-known trick to compile the .c twice w/o changing
too much of the
original package? For example, does it make sense to
configure in two
different locations, once with --enable-shared and once with
--enable-static, for example? Do we have an example of a
small library that
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Yves Arrouye wrote:
[Compiling a library, --enable-shared and --enable-static]
All libraries must have a shared version in the lib package and a static
version in the lib-dev package. The shared version must be compiled with
-fPIC, and the static version must not be. In
On 20001009T214211+0200, Simon Richter wrote:
.static.o is bad because it is not portable to other compilers.
Um, what compilers do not allow the user to specify the input/output
file name?
--
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % [EMAIL PROTECTED] % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%
In any case, since I'm one of the upstream maintainers of
the package I'm
packaging, I just changed it so that it will compile both
.o and .static.o
w/ different flags. But I'm still interested in clarifying
your answer.
.static.o is bad because it is not portable to other
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
.static.o is bad because it is not portable to other compilers.
Um, what compilers do not allow the user to specify the input/output
file name?
There are some strange commercial compilers out there that have this
problem. Since this is the
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Yves Arrouye wrote:
[.static.o]
Do you mean that non-gcc compilers won't obey -o at the same time as -c?
Possibly.
I don't use libtool because libtool has problems when gcc is used with the
platform's ld on Solaris for example: static initializers aren't called.
Does
There are some strange commercial compilers out there that have this
problem. Since this is the upstream package, not the Debian one, you
cannot assume a certain compiler. Also, two suffixes don't
work with BSD
make.
The library does require gmake :) I guess I could use .ao or whatever.
I don't use libtool because libtool has problems when gcc
is used with the
platform's ld on Solaris for example: static initializers
aren't called.
Does the Solaris runtime linker support that?
It does for CC output, not for gcc. That's the problem. libtool should
recognize that and
28 matches
Mail list logo
