Re: Source packages
Hello Neil,
[...]
> emdebian-buildsupport - lintian support for Crush (the only remaining
> part of emdebian-qa), dpkg-vendor support for Crush, embuilddeps (to
> replace emdebuild --build-deps) and scripts to use with the Crush
> experiments. No longer needs libemdebian-tools-perl. Depends on
> pdebuild-cross which depends on multistrap.
Maybe this one should be called or merged into emdebian-crush, as it
contains most crush related stuff.
> emdebian-crush - emchain (could be replaced with Hector's buildcross),
> emsetup (probably not useful any more), emprunecross (somewhat useful,
> sometimes) and emdebuild (superceded by dpkg-buildpackage support). So
> this package might not actually be worth keeping. (It was to be the new
> name for the old emdebian-tools package and is in experimental.)
Should buildcross be a separated package or included into emdebian-crush?
> emdebian-grip - no problems with this one.
Should we have a emdebian-baked source package? I am also thinking on
a emdebian-installer which contains all kind of scripts to do
installations on SD/MMC, maybe MTD devices, etc... I would be willing
to work on it.
> So, the questions:
>
> 1. What to do with the emdebian-tools source package. What should it
> contain? What do we still need?
could emdebian-tools maybe be the naming for the above called
emdebian-installer?
> 2. Where should pdebuild-cross live (until it is good enough to be
> considered for pbuilder)?
>
> What about this setup:
>
> multistrap source => multistrap binary
>
> emdebian-tools source => emdebian-buildsupport pdebuild-cross
>
> emdebian-crush would include a reduced libemdebian-tools-perl but we
> can do without it entirely, if we want.
While I have another mind set, all this sounds reasonable to me.
> My only issue with that is that I wanted pdebuild-cross to get into
> unstable sooner than emdebian-crush will be ready.
>From your writting I thought the above listed packages were the source
packages, so why not have a pdebuild-cross as a source package
providing its binary?
To be more explicit, I am thinking on this set of source packages:
* multistrap - easiest to keep that as a distinct source package, that
way it can quietly include the -cross chroot stuff but still be seen as
a suitable replacement for debootstrap in things like pbuilder.
* pdebuild-cross - actually a very small package which could be subsumed
into pbuilder once we stop relying on apt-cross. Currently, that's in
the emdebian-tools source package as a separate binary package.
* emdebian-crush - lintian support for Crush (the only remaining
part of emdebian-qa), dpkg-vendor support for Crush, embuilddeps (to
replace emdebuild --build-deps) and scripts to use with the Crush
experiments. No longer needs libemdebian-tools-perl. Depends on
pdebuild-cross which depends on multistrap.
* buildcross - scripts to replace emchain for cross toolchain
building and some other utils to cross bootstrap a tiny core from
source.
* emdebian-qa - dropped.
-> We might need an emdebian-v&v like package sometime, for validation
and verification or maybe provide with all code some kind of unit
tests.
* emdebian-grip - no problems with this one.
* emdebian-baked - new scripts for experimenting on baked
* emdebian-installer - scripts to ease the way to install cross
systems into SD, MMC, MTD devices (internal flash memory), USB and I
believe that's it. Since today we have only been focusing on rootfs,
but using make-kpkg together with flash-kernel and the cross tools
will not be much hard to provide a common way to build bootloaders and
kernels so devices which are not supported officially in debian are
easy to install providing a kernel/bootloader tree for them.
In any case, I am confortable either way, the first proposal you did and mine.
Cheers,
--
Héctor Orón
"Our Sun unleashes tremendous flares expelling hot gas into the Solar
System, which one day will disconnect us."
Reply to: