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

Re: New ksh/ksh93 package, half the size, ten times the features!!!!

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:02 PM, Giovanni Rapagnani <giovanni@ideanet.be> wrote:
> Hi,
> The sources are here:
> http://www.nrubsig.org/people/fleyta/debian/ksh/astksh20131010_deb_prototype/ksh_93v-20131010-1.debian.tar.gz
> http://www.nrubsig.org/people/fleyta/debian/ksh/astksh20131010_deb_prototype/ksh_93v-20131010.orig.tar.gz
> On 06/11/13 18:21, Joshuah Hurst wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Joshuah Hurst <joshhurst@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> FYI
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: ольга крыжановская <olga.kryzhanovska@gmail.com>
>>> I have uploaded a prototype of the new ksh Debian package to
>>> http://www.nrubsig.org/people/fleyta/debian/ksh/astksh20131010_deb_prototype/ksh_93v-20131010-1_amd64.deb
>> Feedback for the (contents of the) package would be very welcome...
>> Josh
> I haven't been able to compile the package neither on debian testing nor
> on debian wheezy.
> The package is based on the alpha build dated 2013-10-10 and the
> debian/rules build target calls a script (buildksh93.sh) which comes
> from opensolaris project. As far as I can see, the script is only able
> to build i386 and x86_64 binaries (when using a linux kernel) but I
> personally couldn't get it to work.
> Olga, I don't understand why you did the package like this for the
> following reasons:
> 1/ recently Glenn has worked on ksh sources so that it now support
> debian multiarch. Starting with the INIT-2013-10-30 and
> ast-ksh-2013-10-10 releases, I have verified that the sources compile
> just fine on debian wheezy, debian testing and even on ubuntu 12.04 LTS
> and raspbian wheezy on ARM without relying on an external script. Have a
> look at this post if you want to get the last release
> http://lists.research.att.com/pipermail/ast-developers/2013q4/003669.html
> 2/ when I look at your debian/rule, the way you call the buildksh93.sh
> script makes usage of just a small part of the whole content of the
> script. Half the script is about solaris stuff and another amount of it
> handles pathcc and pcc compilers which are not available in debian.
> Wouldn't it be worth to get rid of this script? We could use quilt
> patches to enable/disable features (like Oliver did with the current ksh
> package in debian) or just directly provide the required builtin header
> file (instead of creating it with a cat >file.h <<EOF construct).
> Without the buildksh93.sh script, the compilation could be tested on
> other architecture.
> If we can't get rid of the buildksh93.sh, I have here other remarks
> about it:
> - the script is executed using /usr/bin/ksh. Is it fine to have a build
> dependency on the package we are about to build? If it is, the build
> dependency in the debian/control file is missing the ksh entry.
> - the buildksh93.sh has code under the CDDL license, the
> debian/copyright file should then be updated

Doesn't a Debian-on-Solaris release require this?


Reply to: