Re: [Swftools-common] Planning to package swftools for Debian

[Simo Kauppi]

On Sun, Jan 01, 2006 at 11:28:47AM +0100, Matthias Kramm wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:45:15PM +0200, Simo Kauppi wrote:
> > I haven't found a sponsor from debian-mentors, so it is not officially
> > included in Debian yet.
> 
> What does one need to find a sponsor? Something I can do to help?

A sponsor is somebody, who has done Debian development for a long time
and can actually upload the package to official Debian. The idea is that
non-DDs can contribute to Debian. A sponsor basically checks the
package, so it is done according to the Debian policy and other
guidelines.

If you know a Debian developer, who is capable of uploading (sponsoring)
a package, you could tell her/him that the package is ok from the
upstream point of view.

> | avi2swf.m4: added 'sed s/"-rpath "//' to avifile-config, as Debian does not 
> like -rpath
> 
> Shouldn't this be fixed in avifile-config, not in swftools?

Absolutely :) This is just a work-around to keep lintian/linda (the
tools which check the Debian package) happy.

> | Added checkking of libart, as Debian prefers building against its own
> | libart (currently libart-dev 1.4.2-27 and libart-2.0-dev 2.3.17-1).
> | Could you let me know, if either of those has any known issues with
> | swftools.
> 
> I'm not aware of any known issues, and so far the libart included
> in swftools is pretty "vanilla". This might change in the future,
> though. For 0.7.0, however, I guess using the system libart should
> work.

Good.

> | Removed make in m4/, as there is nothing to do
> 
> Actually, the Makefile in m4/ does a sanity check for the make
> program. On a modern system, this shouldn't be required anymore though,
> so this can indeed be removed.

Ah, I didn't notice that. Good point :)

> | Removed LN_S and use debhelper's dh_link instead, because LN_S links
> | to /home/myhome/projects/..., which doesn't look good in the Debian
> | package
> 
> I didn't find the dh_link call in build.diff.gz, did I miss something
> here? 

The dh_link is in the 'rules' which is the main makefile for a Debian
package. After building and installing to a temporary location, dh_link
makes the links default_viewer.swf -> simple_viewer.swf and
default_loader.swf -> tessel_loader.swf.

> Where does the "myhome/projects/" come from, btw.?

Good question :) Come to think of it, it comes from calling
$(MAKE) install prefix=$(CURDIR)/debian/tmp/usr, when I build the
package in my home directory.

I.e. if I would 'make install' normally from the tarball, it would
ln -s $(pkgdatadir)/swfs/simple_viewer.swf $(pkgdatadir)/swfs/default_viewer.swf
where $(pkgdatadir) is $(prefix)/share/swftools.

I should be able to tell it to link relative in the directory and not
use the absolute path.
 
> | lib/h.263/Makefile.in is missing
> 
> lib/h.263/Makefile is no longer called, so this is intentional.
> (The wrong comment at the top of the Makefile has been fixed now)

OK.

> I'll do my best to include most of the other changes in the official
> package.

Excellent :)

> (Except for the @WAV2SWF@ change, because the lame-less
>  wav2swf (which lacks mp3 compression, but can create SWF files
>  from WAV files nonetheless) has been used as such by some users)

When I first compiled swftools without lame and tried to run wav2swf, I
got 'Error: no sound support compiled in.', so I assumed that it cannot
be used without lame. What am I missing?

> Greetings
> 
> Matthias

Meanwhile, I did some changes to work around the Debian issues in the
'rules' makefile instead of patching the swftools itself so much.

I also made the 'official' swftools package so, that it has absolutely
minimum changes in order to get it into Debian more easily (a lot of
changes means a lot of checking for a sponsor and that might be the
reason nobody has taken it yet).

I'll put the rules files into
http://www.iki.fi/simppa/debian-swftools/changes/rules.official and
http://www.iki.fi/simppa/debian-swftools/changes/rules.nonfree
so you can see what they do.

I also get a weird notice from pdf2swf in my amd64 box (but not in the
i386):

NOTICE  processing PDF page 1 (842x595:0:0) (move:0:0)
NOTICE  file contains jpeg pictures
rfxswf: sizeof(RGBA)!=sizeof(U32))rfxswf: sizeof(RGBA)!=sizeof(U32))NOTICE  SWF 
written

The swf still looks ok.

BR,
Simo
-- 
:r ~/.signature

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature