[Pkg-pascal-devel] Installation issue with FPC 2.6.4

[Abou Al Montacir]

Hi All,

I've fixed the issue and pushed everything.
Can you please review and upload?

Cheers,
Abou Al Montacir,

On Mon, 2014-04-14 at 07:11 +0200, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 11:13 +0200, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > On 10-04-14 21:43, Abou Al Montacir wrote:
> > > There is currently an installation issue that was introduced by
> > > 91d65beba371e513fb9b4e0c4f4afd7f7eeee068 when fixing bug#73368.
> > > 
> > > The issue is that this fix adds a translation files including
> > > file /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/fpdoc.mo that are naturally
> > > available on both packages fp-utils-2.6.4 and fp-utils-2.6.2.
> > > 
> > > One solution could be to rename these file to include the version and
> > > patch the sources to look for the versioned names. But I'd prefer we
> > > discuss this before doing it.
> > > 
> > > Do you see other solutions?
> > 
> > What is upstream stance on this? As I see it, fpc has the gone a long
> FPC generally support only compiler and RTL multiple versions. They
> don't want to support multiple tools versions. They say you'd better to
> use that latest tool version with any compiler version. This means on
> our side to remove versioning on fp-utils.
> > way to allow co-installation of multiple versions of fpc, or is that all
> > done in Debian only? This needs to be handled in a similar way. So I
> As I said above, multiple compilers and associated RTL & units, but not
> tools
> > think the translation files need a version appended (as you suggest) or
> > of course a versioned directory. Unfortunately, I am unsure if the
> > latter option would work without much more work as most standard
> > implementations wouldn't expect to look in sub folders of
> > /usr/local/share/locale/%s/LC_MESSAGES/, but otherwise I think that
> > would be best. For us an alternative could be (albeit ugly and only half
> > working, so I don't think we should go that route) is to use the
> > "update-alternative" scheme.
> I'm not also in favor of using alternatives for this kind of thing. Also
> this will break usage of non default tool, so there is no more need to
> have multiple versions installed.
> 
> > And the most dirty hack I can think of would be to let the latest
> > installed package dpkg-divert these files. But that would mean the
> > earlier installed variants don't have their right translation files
> > anymore. No go for me.
> This also will break using the old package.
> 
> The only solution I see is to have versioned .mo files and to patch
> sources to use new names. However I'm not sure upstream will want to
> accept this. The first reason is that they won't support two tools
> version. The second is that they will need to renames files in their svn
> each time they increment version. The third is that in original sources,
> they expect that the tool is installed with a dedicated prefix, so this
> issue is Debian specific because we removed the prefix to comply to
> Debian standard files location.
> 
> I'd then maybe select the following option: install files in
> /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/fp-utils-${version}/fpdoc.mo
> 
> This means we keep a patch forever. Or of course do not support multiple
> versions of tools.
> 
> Cheers,
> Abou Al Montacir
> _______________________________________________
> Pkg-pascal-devel mailing list
> Pkg-pascal-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-pascal-devel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 213 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-pascal-devel/attachments/20140417/a36ab674/attachment.sig>