On 8 Jan 2014, at 14:57, Sebastian Reitenbach <sebas...@l00-bugdead-prods.de> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 8, 2014 14:54 CET, Richard Frith-Macdonald > <richardfrithmacdon...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On 8 Jan 2014, at 12:38, Markus Hitter <m...@jump-ing.de> wrote: >> >>> Am 08.01.2014 13:11, schrieb Niels Grewe: >>>> Markus expects it to use the configuration you just set using make’s >>>> configure script, while it in fact will use the configuration of the >>>> last installed version of gnustep-make. >> >> I eventually got that. >> >>> Thank you. That's entirely the point. Because in some environments there >>> is no "last installed version of gnustep-make". >> >> I'd still like to know why you can't set one up? > > I think this is mostly a problem packagers are facing. > For example, I create a package for gnustep-make, then install it. > But then, I'm done with it. at least on OpenBSD, there is no > easy way, to rely on an installed version of the same package, > to build additional components out of it. > > With a lot of dirty tricks, I likely could get around it, maybe use > the installed version from the "fake" stage in the packaging process > to generate the documentation. But that would likely end up in > something very ugly. > > Since as I understand Markus has the similar/same problem > for his Debian or Ubuntu packages, I can guess others for other SO/distros > face similar problems. I don't know, Fred, aren't you experimenting > with GNUstep packages on the SUSE build server, how is it working > there for you? > > For that matter, if the gnustep-make package would support > generating and installing the documentation in one go, i.e. > ./configure > make > make install (which would go for me on OpenBSD into a fake environment) > make install-docs (that would use the values from configure, and also > install in that fake environment) > > or an "install-all" (installing the makefiles and the docs with one command) I'm sure you could do that quite easily ... sounds like a good idea as a convenience. But even without that, my assumption about package building is that when packaging you basically always run a script to build/install the software in a location for the packaging system to wrap up into the actual package archive format. That script ought to be able to either use a pre-installed copy of gnustep-make (ie when you have already packaged it and then installed it, so its a dependency of the package you are building now) or use the copy it's packaging, or install a local temporary copy to use. So, for instance, the last case you suggest (installing gnustep-make and its documentsation together), the script might do: configure ... export DESTDIR=... make install export GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES=... cd Documentation make install Yes, that's three commands longer than if you had 'make install-all', but does it matter in a script? So it must be here that I'm missing something ... the reason why the packaging process can't execute a script to build a package perhaps? Are there package builders that prohibit the use of siomple scripts like this? If so, how do they actually build things? _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev