I have :
mappings in Universal ++= Seq(
file("my-application/src/universal/etc/logrotate.d/my-application") -> "/etc/logrotate.d/my-application"
)
But this puts it into /usr/share/my-application/etc/logroteate.d/my-application
Putting mappings in Universal will put them inside the installation directory.
You have to use the linuxPackageMappings.
Start by reading the docs on this. Then take a look at some of the tests, which also act as examples.
Unfortunatly the packaging API is not refactored yet thus a bit spread out.
The LinuxPlugin trait contains some parts of the mappings methods, too.
linuxPackageMappings += packageMapping(files: (File, String)*)
Related
I am using Python3.4. I have installed a certain "itunespy" library from GitHub with pip, to work with iTunes API.
(https://github.com/spaceisstrange/itunespy)
I can now access it from console by
import itunespy
Except the library is only searching the US store through iTunes Api, whereas I need to access the UK store. I looked into the code and found I only need to change two lines to fix my problem.
Please can you tell me how I can access and change the source code of an already installed library.
Thank you.
Fork the repository
Clone the forked repository
Make changes and push to your remote (origin, usually)
You may pip install from your fork
I took a look at source code, and:
a) you may obviously change your source code in locally-copied file
b) you may patch these constants in run-time, like adding this type of code to your main:
import itunespy
itunespy.base_search_url = "NEW_VALUE"
itunespy.base_lookup_url = "NEW_VALUE"
c) library API seems to provide country keyword argument, so you do not have to do any of these hacks mentioned above. Simply do:
itunespy.search_track('something', country='UK')
With this keyword argument, searches should work as expected without any modifications of source code.
you really want to change the sourcecode?
How about just change your implementation?
inherit from the class
override/overload their methods with your own
work with your inherited class and their methods
pro: if there are changes in the original library you will take them with you when you update (secure-patches etc.) but your overridden/overloaded methods are still the one you use.
otherwise if you really want to change the source code, take a branch from github and change the sourcecode as you need it like mentioned by dolftax
I have a code snippet similar to this:
# Compile protobuf headers
env.Protoc(...)
# Move headers to 'include' (compiled via protobuf)
env.Command([include headers...], [headers...], move_func)
# Compile program (depends on 'include' files)
out2 = SConscript('src/SConscript')
Depends(out2, [include headers...])
Basically, I have Protoc() compiling protobuf files, then the headers are moved to the 'include' directory by env.Command() and finally the program is compiled through a SConscript file in the 'src'.
Since these are header files that are being moved (that the src compilation depends on), they are not explicitly defined as a dependency by scons (as far as I understand). Thus, the compilation runs, but the header files haven't been moved so it fails. I have tried exposing the dependency via Depends() and Requires() without success.
I understand that in the usual case, scons should "figure-out" dependencies, but I don't know how it could do that here.
Thanks!
You seem to be thinking in "make" ways about your build process, which is the wrong approach when using SCons. You can't order single build steps by putting them in different SConscripts, and then including those in a special order. You have to define proper dependencies between your actual sources (C/CPP files for example) and a target like a program or PDF file. Then SCons is able to figure out the correct build order, and will traverse through the folder structure of your project automatically. If required, it will enter subfolders more than once when the dependency graph (DAG) dictates this. Defining this kind of dependencies between inputs and outputs is usually done, using a Builder...and in your case the Install() builder would be a good fit. Please also regard the hints for #2 in the list of "most frequently-asked FAQs" ( https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/wiki/FrequentlyAskedQuestions).
Further, I can only recommend to read a little more in the UserGuide ( http://www.scons.org/doc/production/HTML/scons-user.html ) to get a better feeling for how to do things in a more "SConsy" way. If you get stuck, feel free to ask further questions on our mailing list at scons-users#scons.org (see http://www.scons.org/lists.php ).
Finally, if you have a lot of steps that you want to execute in serial, and that don't require any special input/output files, SCons is probably not the right tool for your current task. It's designed as a file-oriented build system with automatic parallelization in mind, a simple (Python?) script might be better at the mere serial stuff...
I've got a very crude implementation working:
var screens = {
a: require('./../react_components/screens/a.jsx'),
b: require('./../react_components/screens/b.jsx'),
c: require('./../react_components/screens/c.jsx'),
d: require('./../react_components/screens/d.jsx'),
e: require('./../react_components/screens/e.jsx')
};
Which works fine, however, I'd like to make it a little more scalable, so that when I change a filename, or add a new file to the /screens folder, I don't really have to keep updating this list of require statements.
I'm using Browserify, so I do have a build step I can hook into if need be (this will be ran in the browser)
So for node/commonjs itself there are modules such as requireindex that will automate this kind of thing. However, the fact that these approaches determine the dependencies at runtime by looking at the filesystem defeats browserify's static analysis so I'm not aware of any of them that are browserify-compatible. Therefore, I'd suggest a code generation route where you use a module such as glob to discover the files you want to export, but then write out a full .js file with the exports all statically coded, and point browserify at that file, which you can regenerate every time during your build step.
Working on the new android side of extensions with the changes. I have my separate extension as its own dependency.
In my code I require references to the Extension.Java class as well as the HaxeObject.
These are located in extensions-api, which is it's own separate dependency.
I've tried including these files in my own dependency, this causes top-level exceptions because a number of the Java files were included twice. I've also tried not including the extensions-api, this works to some extent, however If in the future I decide to use more extensions this won't work (less than ideal).
I need to find a way to reference these files from one dependency to another. so from: MyExtension.src.org.haxe.nme.MyExtension and extension-api.src.org.haxe.nme.Extension
So I guess the point I'm stuck at is how I make these two dependencies see each other whilst compiling so that when they merge to make the .dex file they don't cause top-level exceptions.
I could potentially hack it by placing my extension into the extension-api folder. Something like:
<dependency name="extension-api" path="dependencies/MyExtension" if="android"/>
The issue with this being that the androidManifest merging wouldn't work.
I found the answer here:
the gist is in the project.properties file you want to add the line:
android.library.reference.1=../extensions-api
http://www.openfl.org/community/general-discussion/native-extensions/
In case of a very lengthy built file, I would like to be able to break it into several parts. For instance, the vendors could be all minified into a vendor.built.js file and the rest into an app.built.js file.
How this can be done?
I have a proposed solution for this in my require-lazy project.
It accomplishes something a little different than what you ask though: It splits the application into lazy-loaded modules, as easy (from the developer's perspective) as writing (note the usage of the lazy! plugin):
define(["eager-module", "lazy!lazy-module"], function(eager, lazy) {...})
And then using it with through a promise:
lazy.get().then(function(real_module) {...});
The lazy-module will be loaded once, the first time .get() is called.
For the example above, the build process would produce 2 js files: On containing the main module, the eager-module and all their dependencies. And one containing the lazy-module and all its dependencies that were not included in the previous file/bundle.
The require-lazy project has a few examples that are very simple to setup, you only require Node.js.