[bt-devel] gentoo ebuild scripts

mark lybarger bt-devel@crosswire.org
Thu, 10 Oct 2002 17:22:36 +0000


David's Mailing List and Spam Reciever wrote:
> On Thursday 10 October 2002 04:11 am, mark lybarger wrote:
> 
>>I'm getting real close with the build scripts.  Still looking for
>>suggestions on modules to include.
> 
> 
> Hey neat I was planning on doing this myself eventually. Ok here's what I was 
> planning on doing with sword 1.5.4. If the unicode use flag is set then, in 
> the configure step add --with-ICU and set a dependency on dev-libs/ICU-2.2 or 
> greater. If perl is set compile the perl bindings (found in 
> workdir/bindings/perl) as well and depend on sys-devel/perl-5.6.1-r7 or 
> later.
> 
could you please explain this a little further.  the current ebuild 
scripts are doing a "standard" configure.  what are the value of using 
the ICU and perl flags?

> 
>>The trouble I'm having is which official sources I should be using.  I
>>tried the sword 1.5.4, but couldn't get it to work with any versions of
>>bibletime on my system (gcc 3.2). I didn't want to go back any further
>>in versions, so I stuck w/ cvs.  perhaps once these scripts are ready
>>for testing, we could put up some cvs snapshots of sword and bibletime?
> 
> 
> If make sure you --disable-debug if the unicode use variable is set (there's a 
> problem with some of the tester modules used in debugging) for sword 1.5.4. 
> Like Martin said a 1.2.2 release will be made soon that shall be gcc3.2 
> friendly

debug seems to be disabled by default, no?
.
> 
> If you want to go the cvs route I would make a cvs ebuild in the vein of 
> galeon-cvs, wine-cvs, and kde-cvs.
> 

it sounds like bt 1.2.2 will not be based off the current cvs?  is there 
a cvs branch i could checkout to try this version?  or a tgz maybe? i 
would rather use a "official" version than a cvs snapshot.  the problem 
on my system was that sword 1.5.4 wouldn't build bibletime current cvs. 
  my system can build sword 1.5.4, so if there's a bt that will build 
with 1.5.4 and gcc 3.2, i'm all for that. please let me know where i can 
get the sources :).