Re: scp2 - modules (and fdo#60924)

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:34:38PM +0200, Matúš Kukan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Anyone knows what should be the result of processing scp2 files?
> Few $(OUTDIR)/bin/*.ins files but I mean the solenv/bin/modules/ thing.
> We could install (copy) files directly with gbuild, so what would be
> missing after removing scp2 ?

My vision (for Linux) is that everything is in $(INSTDIR) and packaging
is handled by native means: a spec file for rpm and a control file for
deb. It would mean duplication in filelists, dependencies etc., but at
least it would all be done at _one_ place (not two or more as today) and
in formats that _someone_ understands. I suppose the MacOS X dmg could
be produced in similar way--IIRC the only postprocessing done by the
installer is signing of the product.

Windows need a lot of postprocessing to create the msi, so a substatial
subset of solenv/bin/modules/installer would still be needed for it,
even if we create/use a new description format that is simpler than
scp2. (Note that there is much more in scp2 for windows than for the
other platforms: creation of shortcuts, registry items, and more. There
is also the matter of translation of module descriptions.)

> Especially I don't understand the chaos in various modules (gid_Module_Foos)
>  - do we need them also for Windows? e.g. scp2/source/activex/module_activex.scp

Yes, we do. They are used to create the module tree in the installer,
where you can choose which parts should be installed and which should
not.

D.