[pkg-synfig-devel] Re: Bug#358242: synfig modules not found.

[Paul Wise]

On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 18:04 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> [talking about http://bugs.debian.org/358242]

> CCing this message to the upstream dev list. I'm inclined to just ship
> the .so symlinks in the library package, since these plugins are only
> accessed by libsynfig, not sure if that is against policy tho.

I quote darco's response to my question on jabber:

(10:54:18) pabs: sorry to disturb your relaxation, but did you see the
mail to synfig-devl I send yesterday?
(10:54:50) darco: I have not, I've had a rather busy week. I'll check it
now
(10:55:00) pabs: ok
(10:55:03) pabs: thanks
(10:55:58) darco: hmmmmmmmm
10:58
(10:59:11) darco: yeah, the module loading code was something that I
spent a lot of time hammering on early in development... and when I got
it working I didn't touch it again for the most part. 
(10:59:19) darco: interesting... *reads bug report*
(11:00:05) darco: The whole way modules are handled could use a
re-write, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon considering that it
"kinda works" and isn't a very sexy thing for anyone to work on
(11:00:14) darco: hmm
(11:00:31) pabs: yeah. I think we might just ship the symlinks in the
library package
(11:00:35) darco: so what is getting installed for the modules in the
non-dev package?
(11:01:14) darco: the *.so.0?
No such command.
(11:01:55) darco: honestly, the most ideal case would be to just
have .so files, no symlinks... hell, no "lib" prefix either. That's all
just libtool crap anyway.
(11:02:39) pabs: we ship /usr/lib/synfig/modules/libmod_bmp.so.0.0.0
and /usr/lib/synfig/modules/libmod_bmp.so.0 in libsynfig0
(11:03:01) darco: Yeah, that sounds like the default install
(11:03:13) darco: Shipping with the symlinks would probably be the best
thing to do right now
11:03
(11:04:18) pabs: ok
(11:04:30) darco: But keep in mind that that conceptually plug-ins are
different from libraries and shouldn't have to deal with the madness
that libtool inflicts on us with all of this lib prefix and .0.0.0
suffix BS. If there is a way around all that, then that would be the way
to go.
(11:04:42) pabs: yep
(11:05:01) pabs: Shall I relay this info to the packaging team?
(11:05:35) darco: otherwise just ship the symlinks. Probably be the
quickest fix, and it's not a bad thing. I mean, it's not code. 
(11:05:37) darco: sure
(11:05:48) darco: you can paste my comments verbatim if it makes things
clearer
(11:05:51) pabs: yeah
(11:05:53) pabs: thanks

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-synfig-devel/attachments/20060324/ad030991/attachment.pgp