Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Splitting debs into two parts
Re: Splitting debs into two parts [message #26182 is a reply to message #26171] |
Fri, 09 April 2010 01:17   |
|
Hi,
Thanks for feedback. I agree with most of what you said.
Quote: | mhhhh... I don't see a package containing just executable very useful, as theide without uppsrc source tree has no purposes.
|
This is not really true. Theide can be used (and I do it sometimes) to compile C/C++ code only, without any U++. You just need to add the sources in a package. The other way around is hard - I'm not sure if it is even possible to use the code with different IDE...
Quote: | I agree we should split, but I think the proposal is not ideal.
But I can't improve it ... thinking about it... we are missing "lib" version.
|
Yes I know it is not ideal. I was hoping that someone would post some better ideas here 
Quote: | upp - IDE + other binary stuff (should be able to work with libupp?) Maybe even precompiled best examples like Uword and such?
|
I would say compiled examples should be in separate package. Technically it is easy to do. I could even imagine building reference, tutorial and examples nests. It would give as great quality control tool. When any of the demonstration code fails to build, we would know it next morning. There is nothing more discouraging than nonworking official examples...
I don't like the idea of having many packages as it makes it confusing for users. But maybe the code part could be separated into uppsrc+reference, bazaar and the examples+tutorial.
As most of you said, the only direct benefit is the reduced size. Even the rules in Debian policy manual that I mentioned in the first post are designed to save the repository space. But I think it won't hurt anybody, so there is no real reason not to split the debs. Also it might bring some small bonuses for advanced users. E.g. with separate sources and theide, you can use nightly build of theide while keeping stable release of sources (using "hold" in apt/aptitude/synaptic).
Also one additional idea: What about NOGTK builds? I would be the first to use that, as my ubuntu box has very small hdd and I don't have all the GTK stuff installed (I'm building my theide manually...). Probably there are some also other people who would appreciate that for whatever reasons.
Any more comments or ideas?
Best regards,
Honza
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Jul 18 06:38:14 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04185 seconds
|