[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [patch]: automatically buiding rpm (and others) with automake

From: Christophe Tronche
Subject: Re: [patch]: automatically buiding rpm (and others) with automake
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 23:53:28 +0100
User-agent: SEMI/1.13.7 (Awazu) CLIME/1.13.6 (وخ±) Emacs/20.7 (i386-redhat-linux-gnu) (with unibyte mode)


> > In the, chances are that you've something like:
> > 
> > AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE(autopack, 0.1.1)
> > 
> > You've to add this (for example):
> > 
> > AP_INIT_AUTOPACK(An automake package generation module,
> >         0,
> >         GPL,
> >         Applications/Multimedia,
> >         Christophe Tronche <address@hidden>,
> >,
> >         [This is an extension to automake to let make build
> >         effortlessly (hopefully !) packages such as RPM, .deb, System
> >         V, etc... packages. To use this, put AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS =
> >         package-xxx in your])
> >


> I guess the only thing that concerns me right now is that the list of 
> positional
> parameters in AP_INIT_AUTOPACK might become a little unwieldy in future as we
> add further options, many of which are specific to particular packagers. Could
> we do it with a bunch of separate macros, e.g.
> AP_INFO_AUTHOR("Christophe Tronche <address@hidden>")
> ...
> Options that aren't specified could take sensible defaults (certain options
> would presumably be mandatory) or if they really need to be specified for a
> particular packager, that package target could fail with an error if the 
> option
> has not been defined.

Actually my idea was this: assume that there's a set of parameters
that are enough to build packages with any packaging software
supported by autopack (an idea that you may or may not buy), you force
the writer of to fill every necessary parameter so that
any packaging will succeed, even if you may ignore some parameters
with some packagers. The fact that EPM uses a small set of parameters
is in my opinion a hint that this should work, but again, this is
something not everyone may agree upon...

Christophe Tronche      address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]