[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [patch]: automatically buiding rpm (and others) with automake
From: |
Simon Perkins |
Subject: |
Re: [patch]: automatically buiding rpm (and others) with automake |
Date: |
Sun, 04 Nov 2001 15:19:30 -0700 |
Christophe Tronche wrote:
> Ok, the week-end is over, and I had promised something, so here it is.
> ...
All looks very cool.
> In the top Makefile.am, put
>
> AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = package-rpm
>
> In the configure.ac, chances are that you've something like:
>
> AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE(autopack, 0.1.1)
>
> You've to add this (for example):
>
> AP_INIT_AUTOPACK(An automake package generation module,
> 0,
> GPL,
> Applications/Multimedia,
> Christophe Tronche <address@hidden>,
> http://gnu.org/automake/,
> [This is an extension to automake to let make build
> effortlessly (hopefully !) packages such as RPM, .deb, System
> V, etc... packages. To use this, put AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS =
> package-xxx in your Makefile.am])
>
> The first parameter is a short (one-line) description of the package,
> the 2nd ("0") is the package version,
> the 3rd ("GPL") is the license type (some packagers require it, so
> give some thoughts and pick one)
> the 4th ("Applications/Multimedia"), is basically where to put it in
> the menus (called the "group" in some snobbish way). Some packagers
> may not handle it, but some require it, so it's better to put one;
> the 5th is your address, so that you can be congratulated... or flamed !
> the 6th is an URL pointing to the project;
> the 7th is a long description of the package;
> the 8th (not present in the example) is the path to an icon file, that
> some packager can use.
I guess the only thing that concerns me right now is that the list of positional
parameters in AP_INIT_AUTOPACK might become a little unwieldy in future as we
add further options, many of which are specific to particular packagers. Could
we do it with a bunch of separate macros, e.g.
AP_INIT_AUTOPACK
AP_INFO_LICENSE("GPL")
AP_INFO_AUTHOR("Christophe Tronche <address@hidden>")
...
Options that aren't specified could take sensible defaults (certain options
would presumably be mandatory) or if they really need to be specified for a
particular packager, that package target could fail with an error if the option
has not been defined.
Disclaimer: I'm an automake novice, so apologies in advance if the above is a
pile of dingo's kidneys...
Sy