On Tue, Aug 13, 2013, at 02:55 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Quoting Kaj Ailomaa <[email protected]>: > > As is now, I can change the name of the executable with the configure > > option --program-suffix. > > The files always end up in /usr/lib/pd-extended no matter what. Should > > the config option also change that? > > where do you want the lib-stuff to go? > /usr/lib/pd-extended seems like the right place to me. >
Yes. It's the correct place for those files. Just thinking that if using the configure option to add a sufix to the program name also the folder /usr/lib/pd should be renamed /usr/lib/pd-extended. But, since something in the pd-extended source already does this, in some other way - I don't know how, the folder name will never change AFAIK. > > However, there seems to be a bug. It changes three files, not only the > > executable. > > I solve it by using a postinst script to rename the two files that > > shouldn't. > > > > https://sourceforge.net/p/pure-data/bugs/1105/ > > else i'm not sure whether i understand your problem. > Currently, my problem is renaming the executable. Building pd-extended will create an exectuable named /usr/bin/pd. Using the configure option -"-program-suffix=-extended" it is renamed to /usr/bin/pd-extended. However, as my bug report shows, two other files get suffixes as well. /usr/lib/pd-extended/bin/pd-watchdog is renamed to /usr/lib/pd-extended/bin/pd-watchdog-extended, and /usr/lib/pd-extended/tcl/pd.gui-tcl is renamed to /usr/lib/pd-extended/tcl/pd-gui.tcl-extended. When starting pd, it won't find those files until they are renamed. The postinst script is a workaround. I could also use it to rename the executable too of course. My thought was that using the configure option "--program-suffix" would be the best way to rename everything pd into pd-extended. But, maybe not? > > in any case, i can only reiterate, that the "puredata" package > already handles the renaming properly. the package build process has > proven to work for years. i'm pretty sure that you could just take it > and do a 's/pure-data/pd-extended/g' on the rules-file. > What is changed in the naming? I haven yet investigated. The executable, or something else? > i figure that the "pd-extended" package will only contain the patched > version of Pd (that is: all the externals will be separate packages > that are pulled in via dependencies). so the packaging should be > virtually the same as for "puredata". Yes, I believe so. Except, there seems to be some details different in the build process. At least when it comes to naming. I have no clue about what of course. > > gfmasdr > IOhannes > > > PS: i would highly suggest, recommend or even depend to use > "Recommends" for declaring dependencies on externals whenever > possible. according to the Debian policy [1], "Recommends [...] > declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency". in practice this > means that any package-manager (in their default settings) will > install the recommended packages, but if the user decides to uninstall > one of them, they will not end up with having to decide either to > remove Pd-extended completely or end up with a broken system. > > > [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html > Thanks. I will do that. The idea is that we add a mass of libs to be installed with the package. And using recommends does seem like the best choice. > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
