Re: External dependency proposal: Vala

[Felipe Contreras <felipe contreras gmail com>]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-12 at 12:11 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
>> I would rephrase this as "valac as a build dependency for gnome"
>>
>> as valac is like yacc/bison/flex in that there is no runtime dependency
>> and only people developing or compiling from git will need it (tarballs
>> and distributed source will contain the generated c files so wont be
>> needed there)
>
> If people can't hack from tarballs, then it's useless. I already
> complained to Zeeshan about that, though I'm not sure whether it's
> because of the code in Rygel's makefiles, or automake's vala support.

Most people use tarballs to just compile and install, and git to hack.

So no, unhackable tarballs are not useless.

> Distributors will want to be able to apply patches to tarballs, and have
> the changes automatically rebuilt (even if that means having the vala
> pre-processor installed in the buildroots).

So? The package would include valac as a build dependency, and the
distributed .c files will be replaced.

I don't see what's the problem.

-- 
Felipe Contreras