[openbeos] Re: Site Audit
- From: "Cyan" <cyanh256@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:43:48 +0100 BST
> I think you guys have changed my mind :) Whatever files I come
> across from now on I will include the sources in the same zip file
> as the binary, and include 'sources included' in the description.
> I don't know about going through all 2200+ files though and
> checking if there are sources available.
> I'll do what I can!
I agree that preserving the source files is equally important, if
not more so, than preserving the binaries. Likewise as already
mentioned, Zeta apps are valuable because in the future it may be
possible to run them -- particularly when the source is available.
In the case of Zeta binaries, sometimes the developer has just
linked against the Zeta libraries (isn't it the default?) but
doesn't actually use any Zeta features over and above its enhanced
POSIX support. These might be compatible with Haiku already, or
just by stubbing-out the Zeta-specific functions.
It might be difficult to know which apps fall into this category
without having a stub library to test it with though.
I'm not quite sure what you meant by including the sources in the
same Zip file as the binary?
I think adding the source files/archives inside the binary-only Zip
files (or vice-versa) is a potential problem -- not just because
it's time-consuming, but it could also introduce errors.
For instance, attributes may be lost or altered (especially those
pertaining to Tracker window settings, which are sometimes very
important). More importantly, it would also add unnecessary clutter
to an application's folder where the developer originally went to
some pains to keep it tidy.
Isn't it possible to keep the source and binary Zip files separate
in cases where they were originally like that?
Other related posts:
