Re: slashpackage

[prj@xxxxxxxxxxx (Paul Jarc)]

Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:24:30PM -0400, Paul Jarc wrote:
>> Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> I don't like Bernstein's idea of mixing source and installed binaries
>>> in one tree,
>>
>> Symlinks can fix that, if you like.  The idea is that files should be
>> *accessible* via their standard /package/... paths; they can be
>> *stored* however you like.
>
> I know, but say "the source is accessible via /package/..." means
> someone will write his/her build scripts to *assume* it is there.

That's how native slashpackage packages are supposed to work.  OTOH,
for "foreign" packages, in my SPF project, I don't put the sources
under /package at all, except for the Linux kernel, since a few
packages need those sources.

> The same for referencing files from other packages. All references
> at *build* time should be redirectable to at least another location.

What's wrong with setting up the symlinks before building?  Why do you
want to use another method of indirection instead of the one symlinks
already provide?

> I don't want to say "link to this absolute path", just link to that
> library and here is where to find it.

What's the difference?


paul