Ah, yes. It was just a tar, but named ".tar.gz"
I may be back in a minute with more info now.
Well, that was easy - quite anticlimactic actually:
step 1) run 'qmake fred.pro'
step 2) run 'make'
step 3) have beer.I was lacking some of the dependencies which lead to a failure of the build, but that is still the process.
Also, that script that struck me as odd with the "#!/usr/bin/make -f" hash-bang was under a debian folder in a file called "rules". For all I know this may be normal for debian packages, it is not the 'normal' makefile.
Short time for beer, it compiled quickly- thank you for your help. I'll tweak it for Arch and see how it goes before putting it in the AUR. The dependency is hivex (in AUR) by the way. Not sure about the problems you were having with the file- I uploaded it and downloaded to confirm it worked (it still does for me).
]]>I may be back in a minute with more info now.
Well, that was easy - quite anticlimactic actually:
step 1) run 'qmake fred.pro'
step 2) run 'make'
step 3) have beer.
I was lacking some of the dependencies which lead to a failure of the build, but that is still the process.
Also, that script that struck me as odd with the "#!/usr/bin/make -f" hash-bang was under a debian folder in a file called "rules". For all I know this may be normal for debian packages, it is not the 'normal' makefile.
]]>Other than that I can't be any help until "tomorrow". You won't really need a configure script since it will only be a package for Arch. I would worry about just getting the commands necessary to compile it on Arch specifically. The developer can make a configure script if they want it widely distributeable.
]]>Edit: I must be really bored tonight. I passed whatever that was (the not-quite-tarball) through gnu strings and less, and sure enough I was able to scroll through most of the code. Along the way I saw a Makefile hack with a initial line "#!/usr/bin/make -f" which would run make and treat the contents of that file as a Makefile. Reading it in this way I could not determine what the filename was, but it may have ended in ".sh" or it might have been called "install". In any case you can do `grep '/usr/bin/make' * and run whichever file matches.
I'd also ask the developer to consider dropping that hash-bang invocation and just properly naming that file "Makefile".
edit2: there is also a reference to the ".pro" file which is used by qmake (I think) like a Makefile.
edit3: I just verified on a few properly made tarballs: `strings <name>.tar.gz | less` does not show anything remotely readable in any other tarballs, but run on yours I can read *all* of the code directly. I'm not sure how you made that tarball, but you may want to look into that.
]]>If the source is released tomorrow, then read the README that comes with it. If you still have problems, come back with a link to the source. But until then how do you expect anyone to help?
edit: I guess I'll still try. You say it's "mainly" a bunch of .cpp files. What else is there?
]]>The site says see the README file for compiling ... what's in the README?
Is there somewhere we can see what is in this package ... or how can we help?? My telepathy isn't telling me anything.
]]>Any advice or pointers to resources would be greatly appreciated. I've also got a message out to the developer about it- the more I can learn on this the better. The source isn't on the site yet, but the application is fred, located at:
Thanks in advance!
]]>