Re: Please reviewi wip/*matchbox*

[Matt Dainty <matt%bodgit-n-scarper.com@localhost>]

On Sun, 2005-01-02 at 13:07, Martijn van Buul wrote:
> Please don't trust my judgement too much; I don't have a clue what I'm
> talking about either ;) I'll just list a few things I would've done
> differently - without claiming that doing so would be better.
> 
> On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 23:00:00 +0000, Matt Dainty
> <matt%bodgit-n-scarper.com@localhost> wrote:
> > I've fixed up the download site locations for all the packages since
> > handhelds.org went down and came back up again organised slightly
> > differently.
> > 
> > I've bumped up the versions on all of the packages apart from
> > matchbox-wm which seems to have trouble with installing the GConf
> > schemas in later versions.
> > Various bugfixes for most packages, and
> > matchbox-{common,desktop,panel} receiving the most attention with some
> > additional pkgsrc magic.
> 
> libmatchbox should be in the X11 category, not in devel. Or at least
> *also* in x11, since it uses x11.

That's possible, I can add that second category.

> libmatchbox does a second build during the install target.

Yes, I noticed that. I don't think that's a pkgsrc-specific problem
though.

> I seem to recall that tools.mk offers a better alternative to defining
> a pre-configure target to run automake and friends (like in
> matchbox-desktop)

I just followed the pkgsrc docs for this.

> matchbox-panel fails to install; probably because of a missing
> dependency. It tries to run /usr/pkg/bin/msgfmt, but msgfmt is in
> /usr/bin.

Oops, forgot to add BUILD_DEPENDS+= to pull in the pkgsrc gettext
package. The pkgsrc gettext is required otherwise the zh_TW translation
will error with the system gettext tools.

> Is it really necessary to make individual packages? All packages seem
> to be rather small, and closely tied to eachother. Furthermore, your
> packages don't seem to register mutual dependencies. I'd assume that
> matchbox-panel-manager depends on matchbox-panel, but it doesn't.

Well, these are how they were done originally, (my own efforts also did
them as individual packages). What is the policy on lumping small
packages together?

Matt



-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
pkgsrc-wip-review mailing list
pkgsrc-wip-review%lists.sourceforge.net@localhost
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-review