Debian build

[gonosztopi]

@Vollstrecker wouldn't it be sufficient to use libgd-dev instead of libgd2-xpm-dev | libgdchart-gd2-xpm-dev in debian/control ? For me it seems to be a reasonable change.

[Vollstrecker]

I remember back in the days libgd2-xpm-dev was the one with the needed headers, and at some point someone poked me that ubuntu has a different name for it now, with is the second one. I've never checked that again, but will do within the next few hours.

[sandrotosi]

In Debian we're using libgd-dev: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/amule/-/blob/master/debian/control#L15

[gonosztopi]

Ubuntu also has libgd-dev

[Vollstrecker]

k, then I think this can be changed untested. I'll do it directly here from the webinterface now.

Btw. I've read the issue about the problems with this stuff. The guy is right, if built locally it will be overwritten by the packages from debian, but this was intended, as this was intended to ease user keep track of development until new version arrive in debian.

This was from a time when we had significant more releases than debian, so users can stay uptodate when using stable until this get's a new release. I don't think this is needed anymore, so I would for a first step suggest to exclude it from releases.

When I played enough with cmake to let it also create deb's and rmp's, I'm going to drop this stuff at all.

[gonosztopi]

Just to clarify: you want me to remove the debian/ folder from subsequent releases?

[Vollstrecker]

Exactly. Getting new releases to the users should be distro work. This is meant to let users keep up with development.