How about symlinks to flesh out to FHS? Then the basic shoes distribution remains intact (and the same across distributions) while a reasonably small set of distro-specific symlinks would be all that a packager would need to worry about. (Other than, um, compilation....)
peace, dan On Jan 20, 2008 8:34 AM, Bram Senders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 17:17 -0600, why the lucky stiff wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:50:16PM +0100, Bram Senders wrote: > > > I was thinking of packaging Shoes for Debian, mainly because I think > it > > > would be useful to have such a package, so that people on Debian > systems > > > and derivatives have an easy way to install Shoes and create apps (and > > > because somebody had already nudged me to create such a package), and > > > possibly because it will expose it to more people. > > > > Way to be helpful, this would be very generous of you. Even if we > > end up devising all-in-one executables, having the Shoes distro > installed > > through apt will be a speed pass. I just haven't gotten around to > > making any yet. > > Eej _why, > > I'm having a bit of trouble packaging Shoes which I don't seem to be > able to fix on my own, in part because I do not know what the best way > to fix it. > > It seems that Shoes is designed to be run from a directory with all > files in the same place, i.e. in the way that the dist/ dir is created > and filled with stuff. However, it is not possible to do it this way on > a Debian system, because it must adhere to the filesystem hierarchy > standard (FHS); according to the FHS, the binary and wrapper (shoes and > shoes-bin) should go in /usr/bin; libshoes.so should go in /usr/lib, and > the ruby library files (lib/shoes.rb and lib/shoes/*.rb) should go > in /usr/lib/ruby/1.8. > > Now, I can put all of those files there in the package, but then the > binary or wrapper script can't find the Ruby library files, because you > explicitly set the Ruby load path based on argv[0], which only works of > course when the script and the libs are in the same dir. I could patch > this out, but I really don't know whether this would be the right way to > go (because I don't know the motivation for altering the Ruby load path > in the first place), and when I patch this, then Shoes' Debian source > would differ from the upstream source, and that is not so nice. > > Could you shed some light on this, _why? What do you think would be the > best way to go? > > Cheers, > Bram >
