Hi all
Some questions arose about how to correctly debianize externals. Is it correct, that since both 'puredata' and 'pd-extended' provide 'pd', an external binary package should depend on 'pd'? What happens, if you install 'pd-foo' and neither of the Pd flavours is installed, which one would be preferred? Currently, only 'puredata' seems to be part of any apt repository, so there is no ambiguity now, but what if both are available?
Then I realized, that recent nightly builds for ubuntu use new layout and install the included externals to /usr/lib/pd-extended/extra, opposed to the old-fashioned /usr/lib/pd/extra. How is an externals package meant to support _both_ flavours? Should it install to /usr/lib/pd/extra and also create a symlink in /usr/lib/pd-extended/extra ?
If the goal is to debianize all libdirs from current Pd-extended's extra, why the separation? If in the future Pd-extended differs from Pd-vanilla only in that, that it has slightly different features, an enhanced look and different patches applied, why do both need their own extra directory? And if all the libdirs are moved out of the pd-extended packages to their own debs, wouldn't the pd-extended package have to pull in / be dependent on all those pd-lib packages in order to deserve its name? But then again, the advantage of having separate extra dirs for two different Pd flavours is not clear to me.
Also: If there is a separation, what is the reason for having a 'pd' meta pacakge then?
On a not-quite-related side note: What is the /etc/init.d/pd-extended script good for? Or: In what way is it useful to run pd-extended as a daemon?
Roman