[csw-maintainers] need of an additional directory tree under /opt/csw

[Dom]

Well,

these are tough questions for me. As Peter mentioned, having well-identified packages would make life easier for other maintainers who have similar dependencies. To the question "why" I need gcc/g++ compiled libraries, I just can answer the following: more that 440 c++ source files to hack in order to be "Sun-Studio compliant" is a lot of too much work for me, just to have binaries available on Sun Solaris (yes: Sun Solaris, and not Oracle Solaris :-)). I had some cheat chat with the main developers of Kicad and they just answered to me: "we only support Gcc". And indeed: all the patches I submitted to them in order to have C++ code without any GCC specific extensions were refused !
I have no problem embedding specific dependencies within each packages, even if some of them have to be installed twice or more. It is just a question of "quality" for me...
BTW: the incoming Kicad package I'll release will NOT include the "dev" version of WxWidget 2.8.11 I had to provide internally. So will it be for Erlang. Funny is that Kicad depends on Erlang, and both depend on WxWidgets. And I'll have the same case with "boost", unfortunatly.

But this still remains subject to change... for the next versions !

- Dominique

On Aug 17, 2010, at 17:08 PM, Philip Brown wrote:

> On 8/17/10, Dom <dlaigle at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> To start a thread we didn't have time to talk about during the summer camp,
>> I'd like to install some additional dependencies within the CSW tree.
>> Indeed, I have to recompile the WxWidget package with g++ for at least TWO
>> packages, and I think it'd be better to install it under something like -say
>> - /opt/csw/extra-dependencies-gcc instead of embedding it twice into both
>> packages.
>> 
>> Any thoughts ?
>> 
> 
> This is similar to the (admittedly now rather.. crusty) kde/qt issue.
> where we have sun-compiled qt in /opt/csw, but gcc-compiled qt in a
> subtree.
> 
> there is a question of why the tree is neccessary. Then there is a
> secondary question, of how visible does it need to be?
> 
> For the Qt case, there is an accepted need for multiple levels of
> dependancy and compilation.
> Package A, needs package B, which needs qt-gcc.
> Package B needs a "special" set of configuration files (a la
> pkgconfig) for gcc-compiled qt, for Package A to then compile
> properly.
> 
> Are there multi-level compilation issues involved with wxwidgets also?
> If there are not, then even if wxwidgets itself provides "special"
> gcc-related flags, we may be better off keeping the gcc-tweaked stuff
> under /opt/csw/lib/wx-gcc-dev or something like that.
> 
> And/Or, if there is a nice simple top-level "wx-compile-config"
> wrapper, providing  "wx-compile-config-gcc".
> 
> And/Or,
> The  "simplest case" approach, would be if we could get away with providing just
> /opt/csw/lib/libwx-gcc
> Then adjusting gcc-needing dependants, to have
> -R,-L/opt/csw/lib/libwx-gcc at link time.
> 
> So... how fussy/needy is the wxwidgets compile environment?
> _______________________________________________
> maintainers mailing list
> maintainers at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
> .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.