[Slapt-get-devel] A few ideas on source package handling.
danb at mojolin.com
Tue Nov 11 09:13:12 EST 2003
It seems to me there is a grey area here when dealing with source
packages, in that slapt-get right now is just a tool for installing
already built packages.
Perhaps it would be useful to have the author of checkinstall in on this
discussion. His tool already builds slackware packages, and he may have
some good input into the best way to make the source packages, as well.
In any case, if there is some automated functionality for 'building' the
source package, checkinstall might be the better place for it.
And of course, jim from linuxpackages will sure have some input. Maybe we
need to create a 'working group' with it's own email list for coming up
with the best way to do source packages.
Sorry for the ramble...
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Luke Yelavich wrote:
> At 03:17 PM 11/11/2003, Jason Woodward wrote:
> >Well it will have to be Pat's method as he is dictating. Maybe it would
> >be best to approach
> >him with your ideas.
> Point taken.
> >Well, it's not a source "package" at all, rather group of files and the
> >configure/make flags
> >used in a build script.
> Since the Slackware source build information is inconsistent in the first
> place, I will go ahead and use another system for allowing users of
> AudioSlack to build the packages for their system. I will however write to
> Pat about the possibility of at least having some more consistency in the
> package build information that is on the site, or at least find out why he
> does it the way it is now.
> I am still interested in helping you with the source package handling side
> of things, but we need to get consistency upstream first, and I need to
> move on with AudioSlack.
> Luke Yelavich
> AudioSlack Founder and head package maintainer
> Audio software packaged for the Slackware Linux Distribution
> luke at audioslack.com
> Slapt-get-devel mailing list
> Slapt-get-devel at software.jaos.org
More information about the Slapt-get-devel