Re: RFC: moving busybox into its own .deb
On Sun Jan 16, 2000 at 04:01:34PM +0100, Eric Delaunay wrote:
> Erik Andersen wrote:
> > I've been having a bit of difficulty managing busybox
> > for the boot floppies.
> > At the moment, I have my own busybox CVS source tree where I do primary
> > development, and where I apply and test patches sent to me, and generally
> > add/develop/break stuff. In addition, there is also the boot-floppies CVS
> > source tree, to which contributions are added fairly regularly (which is a good
> > thing, and makes both the boot-floppies and busybox better). However, this is
> > also a real pain.
> > When I make changes to my CVS tree, I have to manually merge the changes into
> > the boot-floppies tree. When folks add changes to the boot-floppies tree, I
> > have to manually merge those changes back into my local CVS tree. And in the
> > process, of cource, things like $Id fields always get screwed up.
> > I'd like to get some comments on my splitting busybox out from the
> > boot-floppies tree, and instead being provided by a .deb (just like ash, the
> > kernel, and several of the other tools). If I go ahead and split it out into a
> > .deb, is this the type of change that would have to wait till after the potato
> > release?
> I have to objection you make a Debian package for your busybox provided the
> fact that you build it based on the boot-floppies needs (i.e. configuration
> file from boot-floppies tree).
> IMO, you will have to add a "conflicts: sysvinit, fileutils" rule (maybe
> others too) to ensure that your package will never be installed in a debian
> system. That will break it I think.
> This way, it will only be used in boot-floppies build process.
Thanks for the support. I assume you mean "I have no objection to" instead of
"I have to objection" (which have opposite meanings) based on the context of
the rest of your message. The conflicts line would actually read something
Conflicts: bsdutils, fileutils, findutils, grep, gzip, mount, procps,
shellutils, sysklogd, sysutils, sysvinit, tar, textutils, util-linux
Yes, it would be exclusivly for the boot-floppies tree (just like ash is
alledegly supposed to be exclusivly for the boot-floppies even though in
practice that doesn't seem to be the case or else bugs like (Bug #50788) would
be fixed already).
There is no reasonable purpose for busybox to be in Debian except for the
boot-floppies, so there should be no problem. I'll package it up this
Erik B. Andersen Web: http://www.xmission.com/~andersen/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--