[Firebird-devel] building (super)firebird 32/64bit I/O and debs

[Grzegorz P. <gr...@se...>]

Hi!

As some of You may remmember I am trying to create debs of FIB
(now even FIB 1.0).

I really would like to ask You some philosofical question if first
place (like: what's the benefit of building NOT from source only/
why don't You intergrate boot-kit into main source and just build
from it and only from it?)

Instead that I have simple question. Im debian package build process
I have stages like in normal build process. I mean configure, build,
install and make_package.

Can I:
./Configure.sh
make firebird
make superfirebird
make install firebird
make install superfirebird

Or it will f**k everything up and instead I have no other option than:
./Configure.sh
make firebird
make install firebird
make superfirebird
make install superfirebird

(I know that such targets wouldn't work, that was just modelling)

Second: Is there any benefit to build 32bit I/O version on Linux
i386 systems? For now I build only 64bit versions, but to be honest
I am not sure if delivering 32bit version would make any sense?
(Woody will have 2.2.X kernel as its default, but as release nears
I see no way FIB deb could make into it).

Thrid: I see that old debs dissapeared from sf.net repository;
small questions here:
- is there any place I can find them ?
- I have problems contacting original author - do any of You have
(debianized) source for them of debianizing diff?
- what's the purpose od RC2 firebird-devel package?
- what package set would you suggest ? two I/Os * two types
  (super/clasic) = 4 + 1 doc package.
  Is there anything that could go into -devel package? some *.h files?

That's all folks!

				Grzegorz Prokopski

PS: I must say that FIB 1.0 really isn't prepared for building with
bood-kit. For example this (maybe unnecesery, at least for boot build)
dependency on pyxis makes it impossilble to buid properly.
burp: gbak $(GBAK): pyxis

WILL YOU EVER BE interested to any cleaning/unbreaking FIB build
system??? If not - I may just stop sending such notes here.
Previous note about weak/broken cleaning went unnotoiced (it seems).
The same history is with missing isc4.gbak...