On 04/05/12 21:45, Andres Mejia wrote:
> On May 4, 2012 4:43 PM, "Fabian Greffrath" <fab...@greffrath.com
> <mailto:fab...@greffrath.com>> wrote:
>>
>> > libav -> x264 -> libav
>>
>> AFAICT the x264 frontend uses libav whereas libav uses the libx264 shared
>> library. So theortically (!) this issue could be solved by two separate
>> source packages for the x264 frontend and the library.
This would also be pretty straightforward via the DebianBootstrap
proposal from the wiki: the stage-1 build of x264 would only compile the
library, and omit the front-end.
I believe the current state-of-the-art for bootstrapping new
architectures, or getting a particularly "slow" architecture caught up,
is essentially to do the equivalent of that proposal, but by hand
(dpkg-buildpackage -d, and maybe temporary source changes that are never
uploaded).
dbus and dbus-glib also have cyclic build-dependencies: you can break
the cycle by ignoring the dbus-glib dependency (which means most of the
dbus regression tests aren't compiled), then building dbus-glib, then
rebuilding dbus against it. In the absence of a finalized version of the
bootstrap proposal, this is documented in comments in debian/control.
> This doesn't resolve the issue with opencv though.
What's the cycle here? Can it also be broken by temporarily taking out
similar optional functionality - tests or front-ends or something?
S
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4fa4f75f.6060...@debian.org
