[arch-general] packer vs packer-io
Andre "Osku" Schmidt
andre.osku.schmidt at gmail.com
Thu Jun 23 15:25:08 UTC 2016
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Florian Pritz via arch-general <
arch-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 23.06.2016 16:04, Andre "Osku" Schmidt via arch-general wrote:
> > I would like to provide the user a single command to build "my" software
> > (eg. make), but am not sure what i should do.
> If there are pkg-config files or similar to detect the correct settings,
> use those. Otherwise, just default to whatever is most common and
> provide a configure option or environment variable (when you only have a
> makefile) to change the value. Feel free to add a sanity check that for
> example looks at the --version output if there is something like that.
> If you add that, include an option to disable it though. It might break
> in the future depending on what you look for.
> Also, you want the distro maintainers to package your software for you.
> They know what to do and they do stuff like this all the time. You don't
> have to waste time on creating packages yourself or ask normal users to
> install from source. Experienced users will be capable of changing a
> configure option if they really need to build from source. Normal users
> should use packages maintained by their distro.
> Also kind of fitting: http://kmkeen.com/maintainers-matter/
ah, sorry for leaving you with the impression that i'm using `make` for the
classical use-case, my bad.
i'm using make to simply run shell commands. and what it builds is a
vagrant box (virtual machine) that is not really supposed to be added in
linux distro package manager repo.
the blog post maintainers-matter is on my todo list, thanks for the
(i wonder if it questions what the "Universal Linux Packages" will do in
such case when different upstreams deliver same executable name? and you
have automation tools that want to run the correct executable?)
More information about the arch-general