Dear Andreas,
On 9/28/20 10:00 PM, Andrei Rozanski wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On September 28, 2020 21:35:07 Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> wrote:
Hi Andrei,
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:20:11PM +0200, Andrei Rozanski wrote:
Its definitely OK. I do not think whether there is any "good
practice" to
work around broken upstream Makefiles.
this will fail on all other build architectures than amd64 under
Linux.
May be its sensible to replace it simply by
sys.*/
I will look into libsmithwaterman. Thanks!
Unfortunately I cannot make it happen. I have been checking d-shlibmove,
soname but I cannot put pieces together.
I have worked on a few changes. Can you please check if it make sense?
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/ampl-netlib-solvers/-/blob/master/debian/patches/fix-makefile-shared-lib.patch
Thanks!
Best
AndreiR
Thanks. I will try it out.
May be I was not clear enough. Please *ignore* d-shlibmove for the
moment. What we need first is a shared library since this is mandatory.
If you manage to tweak the build system in a way we can have *.so
**and** *.a then (and only then) we might consider d-shlibmove since it
requires both kind of libs.
I was pointing to libsmithwaterman for binary package names as well
as a potential way to create automake stuff in a patch (but that's
not required).
Sorry if I have dragged you into a to complex dead end street.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Best
AndreiR
