[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Feedback about the cdd-dev package and more...

El Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 03:53:07PM +0100, Andreas Tille va escriure:
> On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Sergio Talens-Oliag wrote:
> > OK, I'll try to, maybe we should send a call for cooperation to all the
> > people interested on CDD, I thought this list was the one, but maybe I 
> > have
> > to post to debian-devel and all the current custom distributions lists...
> > I'll do it tonight.
> I kept Petter in one of my mails in CC to remind him taht something
> interesting is going on...

  I'll try to send the message I proposed ASAP, yesterday I couldn't

> >>The beauty of the directory layout is probably not enough to convince busy
> >>people - but it depends from your talent in discussing (or perhaps 
> >>offering
> >>them some free Spanish wine at the nect conference in Spain - in the later
> >>case I want to be convinced as well. ;-) )
> >
> > Well, maybe on the next meeting that could be arranged... ;)
> BTW, any idea where and when the next Open Source World Conference would
> take place?

  No idea, but we can surely meet before that if the meeting Petter proposed
  is done.

> As I said I agree with you in case it is accepted by others.  I see no
> reason to change if others stay silent (= ignore your suggestion).

  Well, I've just proposed another scheme that lets anyone choose the file
  layout, basically by adding an Include: field on the task definition file,
  so the current systems should not break.

> >>Hmmm, I do not really see the advantage to use these files *in source*.
> >>While I would havo no trouble with this I do not see the advantage.
> >
> > First I have to say that with source package I mean the distribution of a
> > .deb that contains the task directories as I've described before.
> To make it clear to me: I understand you this way that you want to create
> a binary Debian package which contains all necessary files to create the
> binary Debian packages of a CDD (inclusively this package itself which
> causes probably a recursion problem ;-) ).  Is this right?  If yes, I
> see no reason in building Debian packages in a different way than from
> its source package.  But may be I missunderstood you.

  Yes, you have missunderstood me, but is my fault because I have not
  explained things as I should :)

  The idea is that we have an *installable* package that contains all the
  files needed to build the CDD metapackages, a CDD debian-installer or even
  install the CDD without building extra packages (using tasksel, debtags or a
  cdd-install tool).
  The idea is that we can provide a cdd-tools package (or a set of packages)
  that can be used by the final user to install or build the CDD using the
  files provided by a standard debian package.
  This allows a user to do minor changes and have a really *custom*
  installation (for example with different artwork, think about an University
  or School building their own debian-edu with their branding).

  The difference from the debian source format is that the package is
  instalable from the list of binary-all packages and the user does not need
  to know how to build debian packages for simple things (i.e. I'ld try to
  develop something to be able to build a CDD LiveCD doing something like:
    $ cdd-build-livecd debian-med



Sergio Talens-Oliag <sto@uv.es>            <http://www.uv.es/~sto/>
Key fingerprint = 29DF 544F 1BD9 548C 8F15 86EF 6770 052B B8C1 FA69

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: