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 (somewhat useful, sometimes) and emdebuild (superceded by 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 before. > > 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 ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
Attachment:
pgph1BgT0BwLE.pgp
Description: PGP signature