On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 11:06 +0200, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> I have created a new distcc-gtk from scratch, which now depends on the
> existing (unmodified) distcc and gtk2, and adds a GTK+ based monitor
> called distccmon-gnome + an icon and .desktop file.  No more CONFLICTS.  
> 
> You can find the package in pkgsrc-wip/wip/distcc-gtk/ or on
> http://lori.mine.nu:5190/pkgsrc/distcc-gtk-new.tgz .

This is suboptimal because you are duplicating information in two
packages that will be usually the same (and which should always be kept
in sync).  Think about bugfixes, for example.

What I mean is that you should still modify distcc and split its
Makefile in two parts (as you did before), trying to keep as many things
as possible in the Makefile.common.

Then, in distcc-gtk's Makefile, just define BUILD_TARGET and your custom
do-install target.  (I see you found an easy way to build only what you
need :-)

audio/libao* should be a good example.

> One issue though: the resulting binary is installed as distccmon-gnome,
> but I would prefer to name it distcc-gtk, as it doesn't require Gnome
> (it can though, optionally, but that would become a third package then).
> What should I do: leave the package as is, or install the binary as
> distcc-gtk, and add some patches so that the icon and .desktop file use
> the -gtk name as well?  

I think that renaming it to distcc-gtk is a good idea (gnome makes just
no sense in the name if there really is no gnome support).  This will
let us add a possible future distcc-gnome package, if we want (something
that should be trivial to do with a correct Makefile.common in place).

> Is there any chance to get this committed before the branch?  (as now it
> doesn't change the existing distcc and thus can't break anything)  

I don't think so.  This is a new package, something forbidden during the
freeze.

Thanks for doing this!

-- 
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv84@gmail.com>
http://www.livejournal.com/users/jmmv/
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/