On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs <dmitrij.led...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Keep the same svn. With a little bit of auto-foo magic you can > generate two different tarballs and release either of them at their > respective schedules. > > IMHO this should be at least done for the bindings. Because python > bindings autofoo assumes that the libsword is already installed on the > system during build-time. This is very hard to satisfy on buildd / > chroot. On the other hand if bindings were a separate tarball it could > easily build-depend on libsword such that we (as is packagers) create > libsword package first and then create bindings package. > > Maybe I'm wrong. In that case could you please suggest how to build > python bindings when all you have is compiled sword in the current > directory, or you have libsword installed into $DESTDIR eg. in debian > case ./debian/libsword/usr/lib/ and other similar paths. IIRC, you can do --with-sword-dir=$DESTDIR. As to the case for splitting the bindings off, I'm not sure whether this is wise or not. BPBible will probably sometime ship with its own bindings (that way I can do more efficient BPBible-specific filters) God Bless, Ben ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Multitudes, multitudes, in the valley of decision! For the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision. Giôên 3:14 (ESV)
_______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
