[PD-dev] Debian packaging: multi-object/single-file libraries or single-object/multiple-files libraries?

Roman Haefeli reduzent at gmail.com
Thu Nov 11 10:07:06 CET 2010

On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 09:17 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> On 2010-11-10 22:06, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> > 
> > In the case of iemmatrix (and also zexy, which actually already is
> > packaged as a multi-object-single-file library in Debian, but as a
> > one-object-one-file library in Pd-extended) and assuming that there
> > won't be any intelligent loader loader soon, what is the best way to go?
> as upstream i would highly recommend to package it as a library.


> if someone sees a need to _also_ package it as multi-file library,

I guess, there _is_ a need also for the multi-file library. Otherwise
patches made in Pd-extended will break. Don't know what is the best way
to achieve this. Probably something like this:

	generic single-file library depending on the metapackage 'pd'.

	dedicated iemmatrix package for Pd-extended, dependent on 
	'pd-extendeded', compiled as one-object-per-file library.

What do you think? Does that work for everyone, Hans, IOhannes?

OTOH, i could imagine that there won't be acceptance from the
pkg-multimedia team for including the same package twice, besides the
fact that this is very ugly. But I don't see another way than this or
consciously breaking Pd-extended. 

>  one
> could create 2 binary packages out of the one source package.
> but _please_ package iemmatrix as single-file-library until all problems
> with hexloader are sorted out.

> PS: i knew there was another library i should have packaged for debian.

I didn't mean to take that away from you. Before I started I wanted to
point out possible issues. 


More information about the Pd-dev mailing list