[OGo-Developer] Re: [SOGo] sope/sogo and gnustep-make 2

[Sebastian Reitenbach]

Hi,

developer@opengroupware.org wrote: 
> Le 03 Jan. 2008 11:30 EST, "Sebastian Reitenbach" 
<sebastia@l00-bugdead-prods.de> a =E9crit:
> 
> > sogo@opengroupware.org wrote: 
> > > Hi Sebastian,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Your contribution is really appreciated, I will review your patch as 
soon 
> > as possible. I previously made an attempt at this, but the SOGo modules 
> > would not load because of the hardcoded paths in SOPE. I have looked at 
your
> > yeah, despite Helge insits, that these are only hardcoded RELATIVE 
paths ;)
> > 
> > discussion regarding this in the sope-dev mailing list and I am going to 
> > join it instead of discussing this here.
> > 
> > I have a combined bunch of diffs for sope, including my gnustep-make 
> > patchess, and your sogo patchset from the SOPE dir in the sogo sources.
> > 
> > I could send these to you offlist.
> > 
> > Because of the hardcoded relative paths, it is only working for FHS 
> > installation, We have to define some sane relative subdirectory names 
that 
> > can be used for GNUstep based filesystem layouts. 
> > When we can agree on sth. before weekend, I think I can get all 
> > (sope/sogo/opengroupware) updated to be able to run in GNUstep 
filesystem 
> > layouts by the end of the weekend. 
> > 
> > but as you said, lets move to the developer@ list.
> 
> Hi again,
> 
> 
> I am sending you my version, that I did one or two weeks before leaving on 
vacation...
> The particularity of my patches is to keep compatibility with gsmake 1.0. 
Is that something that we want?

no, we want to upgrade to gsmake 2.X
> 
> Also, I had to adapt the SOPE additional Makefiles. But I have doubts 
regarding those modifications because I am not sure which clause is used and 
when...
you mean the wobundle.make, woapp.make and ngobjweb.make?
I had to chage a bit in there too.

> 
> Finally, I did not find any patch for SOGo in your patchset?
you are right, I just got SOGo successfully compiled on OpenBSD yesterday, 
with the changes I mentioned. I already have the configure script working 
for OpenBSD and making similar changes to the config.make creation stuff and 
OpenBSD compatibility changes. I hope the evening today is enough to be able 
to post sth. working for FHS, at least, these are my plans.

On top of the configure script it states, that the user should not need to 
run configure. I use to run configure to create the config.make file. The 
config.make file is the central makefile, there is decided whether to 
install in FHS or GNUstep filesystem layout.
To prevent the user from running configure, there could be a config.make 
distributed, containing sane defaults, e.g. install into FHS layout.
So that only people with some other needs, need to run configure.
I also prefixed every path configured there with a ${DESTDIR}.
This would help to create packages. At least for me on OpenBSD it save me a 
lot of work and prevents me headaches when creating a port.

If you have specific questions, feel free to ask, I'd be happy to 
explain/discuss, and maybe change it if necessary.

cheers
Sebastian