Re: [Hampshire] Re: Application installers

On 22/02/2008, Vic <lug@???> wrote:
> > If one distributes source code software, one can
> > quite easily write the software to be one source code base for all
> > platforms. This is the way the Linux world have approached the
> > multiple platform problem and it is a very neat and cheap solution to
> > the problem.
>
>
> Once again you miss the point.
>
> The packaging situation that has defeated me is for an open-source library.
>
> I am trying to distribute source.
>
> It is not a binary-only distribution.
>
> Are we clear on that bit?
>
> The problem I have is that I cannot build a Debian source package without
> modifying the tarball I get from upstream. So there won't be a Debian
> source package.
>
> The source RPM will be available as soon as I get back to work (it's only
> absent from the FTP site by accident - I thought I'd already published
> it).
>
>
> Vic.
>

The way I get source packages into the various distributions is simple.
I write the code, release a simple source package in simple tar.gz format.
If a distro chooses to use it, they package it up as a .deb or a .rpm
etc. and post patches to me so I can include the .deb or .rpm specific
config files in my source package.
I have a simple make file now.
make dist ->creates the .tar.gz file.
make deb ->creates a .deb on the users system.
make rpm -> creates a .rpm on the users system.

So, if the source package is not in the user's distro, they can simply
download my .tar.gz file, untar it, type make deb then aptitude
install package.deb
I believe that the "make deb" bit can be automated into the aptitude
install package.deb.
The point is, I do not have to distribute any binary packages,
although by now most distros are already including my programs in
their distros.

It works for me, so I don't see the problems you are having.

James