Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [linux-distros-dev] eclipse-build sub-project

On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 11:26:50AM -0500, Ben Konrath wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 23:09 +0100, Michael Koch wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 11:41:53AM -0500, Ben Konrath wrote:
> > > * build technology / language to use: shell? python? something 
> > >   else?
> > 
> > Shell is something available everywhere.
> 
> Ok, any other opinions? 
> 
> > > * patch selection: do we check in all our patches and have a conf file 
> > >   to select the patches we want? or another way?
> > 
> > I think a conf file is okay.
> 
> Cool.
> 
> > > * how we deal with the seamokey vs. mozilla vs. firefox dep.
> > 
> > That can be done by different patches applied in the different distros.
> 
> Sounds good.
> 
> > > * FHS compliance: Fedora/Red Hat packages need this, but is everybody 
> > >   else interested in this? If not, we need the ability to turn this on 
> > >   and off
> > 
> > For now I would like to be able to turn it off.
> 
> Ok. 
> 
> > > * do we want consistent package names and contents?
> > 
> > I dont think thats always possible 100%. E.g. Debian has some rules when
> > naming library packages like SWT. But for the big part of it we should
> > have consistent names.
> 
> Can you elaborate on these rules. Andrew Overholt and I talked about
> changing the name of the swt package. Perhaps we could adopt the Debian
> naming policy for SWT.

In debian we have the policy to name java libraries as follows:

libNAME-java

NAME consists of all lowercase words (separated by a dash if there are
multible words. In the case of SWT we currently name it:

libswt3.2-gtk-java

We have seperated the JNI stuff into again into a seperate package:

libswt3.2-gtk-jni

This extra package is more history as both packages are architecture
dependant now.

> Sounds good. I'll draft up a versioning policy similar to what ooo-build
> has. 

I have thought of another issue we should support: SWT only builds.
What I mean is building the eclipse source package but it only spits out
the built SWT libs. In Debian we currently officially support 12 archs
and some more archs unoffically. It doesnt make sense to provide Eclipse
on all of them. Would you run your Eclipse on some small ARM machine?
But some users want to run SWT applications (like Azureus) on such
architectures. This goal can again be achieved by configured patching
for these cases.


Michael
-- 
 .''`.  | Michael Koch <konqueror@xxxxxx>
: :' :  | Free Java Developer <http://www.classpath.org>
`. `'   |
  `-    | 1024D/BAC5 4B28 D436 95E6 F2E0 BD11 5923 A008 2763 483B


Back to the top