Strange commit to FindKDE4Internal.cmake

Pau Garcia i Quiles pgquiles at
Sun Feb 19 22:46:02 UTC 2012

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 11:41 PM, Ralf Habacker
<ralf.habacker at> wrote:

> There is a linux rpm package installing about 150 Find... scripts into
> /usr/share/cmake-2.8/modules  (the package is named cmake) and a 3rdparty
> library rpm package installing a dedicated Find... script into the same
> location (or a well known 3rdparty location) because the related Find.
> script is not in the cmake binary package ? Is this forbidden ?

On Debian, this is considered a bug. Really.

> Is the library package maintainer be forced to add his Find<lib>... script
> to the official cmake release or to a dedicated
> extra-cmake-find-script-repository and tell the user to install an
> additional dependency ?

The library package maintainer must only add this Find<lib>... to the
library package. He needs not write anything new or look for
Find<lib>... anywhere else. If the original source tarball (i. e.
upstream) includes Find<lib>..., then it will be installed in

> And when his Find... script is not accepted by the
> cmake maintainers for whatever reasons,

I never mentioned this Find... script would ever be submitted to CMake
maintainers. It should not.

> he has to add his Find.. to the
> source and add a note to the library doc as mentioned above and the Find...
> script has to be added to every client library or application ?

I never mentioned that either. It's upstream's duty to include Find...
in the source tarball, not the packages maintainers.

> And on each change in this Find... script every client library or executable
> maintainer has to update the copy by hand and may result into mysterious
> failures with increased maintenance  otherwise.

Once more: maintainers must only package and install what comes from
upstream, nothing new. To avoid duplication, I propose this
/usr/share/cmake-2.8/Modules-like directory where *official* 3rd party
modules (i. e. the one that is installed with libfoo-dev, which is
provided by upstream) would be installed.

> Make this all sense ?

As I proposed it, I think it does.

Pau Garcia i Quiles
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)

More information about the Kde-buildsystem mailing list