<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/27/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Heinz Wiesinger</b> <<a href="mailto:HMWiesinger@gmx.at">HMWiesinger@gmx.at</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
>I don't know like this package - it doesn't comply with Slackware packaging,<br>>so I would go with option 1.<br><br>Now I don't see your point. Slackware itself has some packages, which are just<br>repackaged binaries. Think of Mozilla-Firefox or Thunderbird. So I don't see
<br>why it should be removed just because of the fact, it's repackaged.</blockquote><div><br>I was referring to the fact that the binary searches /usr/local/share/qemu for needed files ,etc.<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
>On 9/27/07, Alan Hicks < <a href="mailto:alan@lizella.net">alan@lizella.net</a>> wrote:<br>>>Robby Workman wrote:<br>>>> I am very much against this binary patching. Symlinking would be much<br>>>> cleaner.
<br>>>><br>>>> That being the case, would it be better to do one of these:<br>>>> 1. Remove the qemu binary repackage script from our repo, since it<br>>>>can't be made to work properly *and* keep everything out of the
<br>>>>/usr/local hierarchy, OR<br>>>>2. Leave the qemu binary distributed in /usr/local as it's packaged<br>>>>originally and add/rearrange only as needed for the docs and such<br>>>>to be compliant with Slackware packaging
<br>>>> 3. Leave it as is and hope for the best<br><br>>>4. Leave it as is and make note of the problem with both solutions in<br>>>the README for the user to consider.Never, ever, out think the user.
<br>>>When the solution is this easy, and it's noted clear in the README file,<br>>>than a user has no right to complain or think a "package" as it were is<br>>>broken.Period.<br><br>I know this is somehow against
SB.o's policy, but what about patching the<br>sources? As I see it, from all the other posts about this, the qemu-bin<br>package is only required, because of the source being not able to be compiled<br>with gcc-4.1. But there are lots of other distributions out there using this
<br>version of gcc, and they also provide qemu compiled from source. So there<br>must be at least some patched available in the internet to make qemu compile<br>with gcc-4.1.<br>And to the matter of 'comply'. If I remember correctly, there are also some
<br>packages in Slackware, which use gcc4 patches.</blockquote><div><br>I don't see anything wrong with this proposal.<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
_______________________________________________<br>Slackbuilds-users mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Slackbuilds-users@slackbuilds.org">Slackbuilds-users@slackbuilds.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users">
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users</a><br></blockquote></div><br>