Hi Ricardo, Sorry for the long delay in replying, I was without email access over Christmas break.
On 12/20/2004 11:01 PM, Ricardo Yanez wrote: > This is not the first time we read each other. To answer your > question... yes, I started with the scripts you mention to create the > debian directory (archaic if you believe the revision logs). As you say, > they are non-working. To make the story short, the --enable-pthread > option had to be removed because it prevented us from compiling within > root (cint) the data reading and analysis codes. I'm guessing a conflict > between the pthread dev files included in the root source and the one > part of the debian system. Interesting. One other thing I thought of in the meantime is the question of the library ABI backwards compatibility. Are the ROOT authors aware of the importance of preserving library ABI compatibility, and especially the difficulty in doing so when using C++? The shared libraries they create don't have any version numbering, so I'm a little leery here... Does it make more sense to have the ROOT shared libs be in a separate directory /usr/lib/root, or dump them into /usr/lib with everything else? If the libraries have an ABI that constantly changes incompatibly, it would be best to have them separate, but then you have to make special provisions ($LD_LIBRARY_PATH or whatever) for linked binaries. Plus you still have to recompile linked binaries with every new incompatible version of ROOT... I don't know the answer to these questions myself, but they'll be important things to consider in packaging ROOT, even if only for a small private set of users due to the licensing issues. regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University GPG public key ID: 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
