[MPlayer-users] Re: Debian build fails with current CVS
hartge at ds9.argh.org
Sat Jan 5 21:36:01 CET 2002
Dariusz Pietrzak <dariush at ajax.umcs.lublin.pl> wrote:
> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]
>> While you are at it: It would be nice, to have seperate DEBs for mplayer
>> and mencoder.
> One little problem - when it's organized like this, then when you try to
> build package, you get both mplayer and mencoder built.
> Not anyone needs both of them, and mencoder has much higher requirements.
> I wouldn't like that.
> This would acceptable and great if only person building packages would be
> developers.. but that's not the case with mplayer.
> maybe i'm missing something.
No, you are perfectly right.
Having multiple DEBs out of one source-tarball is always a hassle, if
you don't want a specific part (editing debian/control an debian/rules,
etc.) or are not able to build a specific part (lacking liblame, etc.)
So this whole splitting everything in little DEBs only gets really
usefull, if mplayer has reached a fully GPLd status (with CPU runtime
detection), where it can be included in Debian, for example.
The only person building the packages and needing all build-deps would
be the maintainer and/or the build-daemon.
Now, this would be only useful for people like me, who use one machine
for building things, but distribute the packages to other machines in an
intranet, who don't have a compiler, for example.
142 Reasons, Why You Can't Find Your System Administrator
91. In his/her manager's office, trying to explain why the manager gets lots
of calls from lusers who can't find the sysAdmin.
More information about the MPlayer-users