gstep-make 2.0 Re: gstep-base Re: [OGo-Developer] OGo Invoice Application

[Helge Hess]

On 02.01.2008, at 07:29, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
> the following relative
> path directory name is hardcoded: Library/Libraries/Resources/NGObjWeb
> but with gnustep-make 2 I would use the GNUSTEP_WEB_APPS to define  
> the place
> where this stuff should be installed.

OK, but how would it continue then? SOPE must know where to search,  
und unlike the current solution using "GNUSTEP_WEB_APPS" at the  
compile time (eg passing it in using -D...) would make the binary non- 
relocatable! (because GNUSTEP_WEB_APPS is indeed a compile-time path).

So what is required is a way to query GNUstep for the value of  
"GNUSTEP_WEB_APPS".

[BTW: GNUSTEP_WEB_APPS is not the best place for SOPE stuff. This is  
for the gnustep-web binaries]

> This is better done in: DocumentAPI/OGoScheduler/GNUmakefile
..
> # TODO: this should rather check the makefile version!
> ifeq ($(FHS_INSTALL_ROOT),)
> ifeq ($(FOUNDATION_LIB),fd)
> RESOURCES_DIR=$(GNUSTEP_LOCAL_ROOT)/Libraries/Resources/OGoScheduler
> else
> RESOURCES_DIR=$(GNUSTEP_LOCAL_ROOT)/Library/Libraries/Resources/ 
> OGoScheduler
> endif
> else
> RESOURCES_DIR=$(FHS_INSTALL_ROOT)/share/opengroupware.org-1.1
> endif
>
> libOGoScheduler_CPPFLAGS += \
>  -DRESOURCES_DIR="$(RESOURCES_DIR)"

Actually I would consider that b0rked because it makes the binary non- 
relocatable. Not sure, probably this is from times before I wrote the  
locator class in NGExtensions.

>>>
> I just took a quick look in the makefiles of libFoundation, there is  
> a lot
> of magic stuff going on. So maybe not that easy as the rest. I'd  
> more likely
> focus on getting ogo compile and run against gnustep-base instead of  
> wasting
> time with libFoundation.

Well, I get the point, but if we want to commit the patches it should  
(must?) work with the packaging! Adopting them to use gstep-make 2 is  
probably no big deal and a good starting point, but reworking the  
packages for gnustep-base will be quite a bit of work.
(and for some reason I guess that you won't do the package work ... ;-)

> what about releasing a ogo 1.1.8, maybe including the AsteriskDialer  
> and
> zOGI ;) as the top new highlights, last gnustep-make 1.13 and  
> libFoundation version, and then concentrating in trunk to compile  
> against gnustep-make 2 and gnustep-base.

Personally I have no objections, but moving to gnustep-base sounds  
only viable to me if we all agree to drop packaging. I somehow doubt  
that Frank will have the time to adopt the RPMs/DEBs for gnustep-base  
in the near future (but feel free to ask/convince him ;-).

BTW: we would also need to create a gnustep-make/gnustep-base vendor  
branch to stabilize it for OGo usage.

Thanks,
   Helge
-- 
Helge Hess
http://www.helgehess.eu/