[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gnash-dev
Subject:    Re: [Gnash-dev] [patch] Fix linker problem with current CVS,	and
From:       Rob Savoye <rob () welcomehome ! org>
Date:       2006-03-29 17:09:22
Message-ID: 442ABF42.20709 () welcomehome ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:

> Well, as a debian maitainer, one of the first things I do when I
> consider maintaining a package, is to see how much warnings are
> produced by the compiler when lots of warnings are enabled, and if it
> is a lot I normally postpone maintaining the package until the code
> quality improves.  And besides, a lot of the warnings from gcc are

   Many of the warnings pre-date Gnash, and are the result of some 
mighty ugly and ancient C++ code. I prefer to have all my projects build 
without any warnings, but for Gnash to do that, it would need somebody 
to spend the time to go through these and fix them. Some have been fixed 
already, but there are a pile left to go through...

> includes getting it to build with -ansi if you want the code to build
> on Irix and HP-UX. :)

   Right, but I don't know if I can about HPUX anymore. :-) (I spent 
years as a developer on HP-UX...) And Irix drives me nuts... Joking 
aside, I guess it would be nice if Gnash could run on these Unix 
variants, as well as Solaris.

> Anyway, if you do not want to enable all these warnings by default,
> what about making it a configure option?  Something like this should
> do the trick.

   Ah, that'll work. I just added this, it'll get checked in later. 
Ideally somebody will use this configure options and start cleaning up 
all the warnings.

> later!".  It is fixed now.  the SWF file is available from
> <URL:http://www.boinydalen.no/solsiden.swf>.

   It plays fine for me using the standalone player. :-) (ia32-ubuntu)

> But do not add the build rules to CVS or at least not in the released
> tarball without talking to the prospective maintainer (Miriam Ruiz, I
> guess from reading the debian bug report), as some maintainers prefer
> to keep the upstream tarball and the debian build rules completly
> separate to ease debian package maintainence.

   I usually maintain both rpm and Debian packaging files, as I like to 
build debs and rpms when I make a release as not everybody grabs a 
package from the distribution. Especially when I start doing snapshots. 
But I usually don't put the packaging directory in the release, it just 
lives in CVS for my own purposes.

   Miriam made a bunch of earlier suggestions I had to change so 
packaging worked better. Those suggestions were all incorporated.

	- rob -



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]