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

Re: Bug#1040032: rkdeveloptool: please switch to newer Pine64 fork



Hi Cristopher,

Quoting Christopher Obbard (2023-07-04 16:01:19)
> On Sat, 2023-07-01 at 11:07 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I own a PineNote, and use rkdeveloptool for flashing software onto it,
> > but have found the code in Debian to be inferior for that use.
> > 
> > Please consider switching to the (slightly) newer fork done by Pine64,
> > which fixes some bugs and improves the user interface, while seemingly
> > fully preserving backwards compatibility:
> > https://gitlab.com/pine64-org/quartz-bsp/rkdeveloptool
> > 
> > What I use now is a fork of this package, maintained here:
> > https://salsa.debian.org/js/rkdeveloptool
> > 
> > If you like, I can push that into the official Salsa packaging git -
> > or you can cherry-pick the bits you like from it, of course. :-)
> 
> I'm fine with picking your patches to the packaging and changing the
> upstream source to this (backwards-compatible) version & uploading a new
> version.
> 
> One question is what do we do about the version? Currently we are tracking
> the upstream source from rockchip https://github.com/rockchip-linux/rkdeveloptool which
> is at version 1.32+git20210408.46bb4c0 but the Pine64 version is at currently tagged at
> version 1.1.0 which is much lower. I wonder if I should do something like tag the new
> upstream source version with an epoch, like 2:1.1.0 ?
> 
> The policy states that prepending an epoch to a pacakge version needs some
> additional consensus from debian-devel:
> > You should not change the epoch, even in experimental, without getting
> > consensus on debian-devel first.
> 
> so I have therefore CC the list to this bug, to see if my thinking is correct :-)

Since none of these forks apparently is actively developed, I suggest to
not take any strong action like introducing an epoch, but instead simply
add a + to indicate that current situation is a mess - which it is:

  1.32+pine64.20210904

Also, I do not recommend to include a git hash, because that is not
sortable like a date is.  If you ever need to release twice on same day
then simply add a .1 suffix.

> Note that also we have written a replacement tool in Rust called rockusb
> (which allows you to write an image with holes to the device, which can
> speed up the flashing), packaging this in Debian is also on my the wishlist:
> https://github.com/collabora/rockchiprs/tree/main

Ohh, that looks very nice!

D you prefer to package that yourself?  I am on a
package-cool-rust-stuff frenzy and can offer to do the packaging of that
tool if you like.  Then we can maintain it together, but easiest for me
is that I simply do the bootstrapping myself.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
 * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: