Hi,
On 24/11/10 19:24, Michael Terry wrote:
In Ubuntu, I'm considering applying the attached patch to update to 0.27.2.
This does several things:
* Builds a gtk3 version of vte (libvte-2.90-9)
Ugh. I wonder why upstream is using that name and not libvte3.so.N or whatever.
It sounds like they will change when they release an stable version, which
doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Can you check this with upstream?
* Adds gir packages for both libraries
* Moves executable to new libvte-bin package
That's not really needed. The executables are in libexecdir, so just build the
gtk+3 version with a different libexecdir, i.e. from debian/rules:
DEB_CONFIGURE_LIBEXECDIR := \$${prefix}/lib/$(libvteN)
You'll need one for the gtk+2 version and a different one for the gtk+3 one.
* Specifies version of python when building/installing, as we ran into
an issue where configure could get rerun during those steps and might
use wrong version of python.
I'm very interested in feedback on the general packaging splits I've done.
In particular, I'd like to get an OK on the package names so I don't introduce
a delta with Debian in that regard.
Undo the libvte-bin change as I mentioned, and check with upstream what are
their plans with the SONAME, so we don't need to change this again in a couple
of months.
For the gtk+3 debian/rules changes, it could be interesting to investigate if we
can use the CDBS flavours support.
Cheers,
Emilio
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
