Manoj Srivastava <[email protected]> writes: > Building two binary packages from a single source seems hackish, > since make and make-guile would require ./configure to be run again, > and each target of the ./debin/rules might need cleanup/restart. Not > unsolvable, but messy, and I do not have the motivation to do > that. Patches welcome, of course.
I do this with libpam-krb5 to build against both MIT Kerberos and Heimdal, and it's very straightforward with a package that supports out of tree builds, like I presume make does. (Nearly all GNU software does.) debhelper has built-in support for doing this; see libpam-krb5's debian/rules file to get a feeling for how it would work. I think building two separate binaries makes more sense than adding Guile support by default for all the reasons you stated. We do similar things with Emacs, which has a -nox version to avoid pulling in tons of X libraries, and I think it's more important for make. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
