On Wed, Sep 26, 2007 at 12:18:38AM +0930, Ron wrote: > > Hi Steve, > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 08:11:10AM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > I'd ask you to reconsider adding a dependency from both -dev packages > > to wx-common. > > > > In a narrow sense, you are right to say that there is no dependency in > > that you *could* build wxWidget-using code without either wxwin.m4 or > > wx-config. > > I think you've mistaken what I've said, and/or what is actually in the > wx-common package.
Yes, I was mistaken about the contents of wx-common. I had looked at the output of "dpkg -L wx-common", seen the man page for wx-config, and somehow overlooked the fact that the actual script does not accompany the man page. > > At the very least, please consider adding a note to README.Debian > > in both -dev packages as to where one may find wx-config and wxwin.m4. > > It took me an hour to find it when I first installed the packages. > > There is already a package relationship here, the -dev packages Suggest > you install wx-common. Actually, only libwxgtk2.6-dev has the suggests, not libwxbase2.6-dev. The main point, however, is that it is a disservice to users to hide the .m4 file -- not to mention the man page. I have never encountered another library that (a) has an autoconf macro file and (b) does not install it with the -dev package. While you may have strong personal feelings about autoconf and static libraries, Debian is better served (IMHO) by common conventions than by idiosyncrasies. > If we can identify a useful note to add, then sure, but this hasn't > exactly been a heavy faq, so I don't really know where heavier signage > would be the most help. Are people more likely to actually read a > README than they are to take notice of a Suggested extra package? I suggest add README.Debian to both -dev packages with the line: The autoconf macro file wxwin.m4 is found in package wx-common. That would have helped me immensely. Why? Because I routinely ignore Suggests when installing packages. And even if I didn't, there's nothing in the package description to illuminate why wx-common is suggested. It was only much later -- when compiling some code -- that I noticed the lack of wxwin.m4. At that point I didn't recall the Suggests. I did, however, go looking in /usr/share/doc/libwxbase2.6-dev/ for some clues. Thanks, -Steve
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
