Re: Package creation with GNU tools

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   Such a package contains a tarball that you can extract by "make
   extract"?

No, what I meant was that "make extract" will extract the _source_
code for a program.  Which you can hack on if you choose, and then
later on you can run "make package" to create a binary package which
you can install manually.  The GNU System Creator won't have any part
whatsoever in the installation of a package.

   > My goal is to make it similar in spirit to /usr/src in the BSDs,
   > since /usr/src defines what the BSD system should look like.
   > Obviously, it won't be as bare as the BSDs, ince it will include
   > all the normal things that a user might wish to see.  For
   > programs that are not that normal (e.g. Bayonne), there will
   > exist packages that are either off site or on a CD.  But in all
   > cases, any package that is part of the GNU system will have a
   > binary package; only that some will be installed by default.

   Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about.

What part is it that you do not understand?

   I am not very familiar with BSD.

Grab the GNU System Creator and poke at it, it is similar to the BSD
Ports system.  Or better yet, read about GAR which the GNU System
Creator is based on.  A quick google should do the trick.

   Autoconf could be replaced just with the dependency fullfiller
   (silly word).  It would not support all those nice autoconf
   options, but it would make sure the dependencies are fullfilled.

This doesn't solve two things: Building the whole system and packages
that are not managed by autoconf.

(and third, really old autoconf scripts)

   At least we should make use of autoconf and automake -- unlike
   Debian.

We are making use of these tools, most projects use them.  But they
cannot be used saftely for building the whole system in a coherent
manner.

   I do not really understand your comments, either...

Well, lets see if we can clear things up then.