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

Re: Source packages

On Sun, 9 May 2010 13:12:39 +0200
Hector Oron <hector.oron@gmail.com> wrote:

> > 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.

buildsupport was added to cut down the dependencies inherent in the old
emdebian-tools package. Those dependencies have now gone and will be
reduced further if we abandon the scripts in the current
emdebian-crush package. At that point, emdebian-buildsupport can
Provides: emdebian-crush, emdebian-tools but it's proving hard to get
all these changes to install correctly. We need one more cycle to
merge emdebian-buildsupport into emdebian-crush and drop emchain.

> > 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 (somewhat useful, sometimes) and emdebuild (superceded by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?

buildcross should be a new package. It's up to you if you want a
separate source package. I'm beginning to think that separate source
packages is the better approach - it avoids the complexity of the
current packages. 

> > emdebian-grip - no problems with this one.
> Should we have a emdebian-baked source package?

There is nothing to go into that package at the moment.

> 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.

OK - again, a separate source package is easier.

It has become SO much easier to handle emdebian-grip since it became a
separate source package.

The only issue with source packages is that ftp-master doesn't like to
have lots of (ostensibly similar) small source packages. I think it
matters more with Architecture: any and all ours are Architecture: all
but I've had this discussion (an 'active' discussion) with ftp-master
> > 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?

I don't think emdebian-tools should be resurrected - we've moved away
from a point where anyone would have a good reason to install all of
the various emdebian packages.

> > 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?

It's very, very small and that causes issues with ftp-master. 

> 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.

I think all that should be folded into lintian support. Other tests
should be done via piuparts changes and other such adaptations. I don't
want to write any more bespoke tools than necessary - Debian has quite
a lot of QA and validation/verification tools so if those aren't what
we need, we should seek to change or adapt them, not create more.

>  * emdebian-grip - no problems with this one.
>  * emdebian-baked - new scripts for experimenting on baked

So far, I think this can be done via small changes in emdebian-grip (as
Baked is just an extra parameter in the Grip process) and documentation
on the website.
>  * 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.

OK, create the buildcross and emdebian-installer source packages, get
them through NEW and I'll do the rest. Feel free to add whoever you
want to the Uploaders etc.


Neil Williams

Attachment: pgph1BgT0BwLE.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: