On 18.05.2015 22:35, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 18/05/2015 22:17, Markus Koschany a écrit : > >> I think I have finally fixed all issues with bnd 2.1.0, so that I'm >> confident the package can be uploaded to experimental at least. >> >> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-java/bnd.git >> >> I had to write a couple of patches to ensure the package can be built >> from source (even twice in a row now). > > Well done Markus! This is an important update. Thanks! > >> I removed biz.aQute.repository and biz.aQute.resolve in our clean target >> because I think we don't need this feature (OSGi Bundle Repository) for >> Debian. Dependencies are usually installed via package managers and I >> doubt that it is very useful to install all the required >> build-dependencies like jetty for example. > > These are new features of bnd 2.x or things already packaged in Debian? These are two new modules in bnd 2.x. We already ship the Apache implementation of OSGi Bundle Repository, felix-osgi-obr, for example but this is unrelated to bnd 2.1.0. https://packages.qa.debian.org/f/felix-osgi-obr.html Of course these modules might be useful for someone who wants to set up a bundle repository. However these bnd modules are currently not required by other packages AFAIK. Both modules require additional dependencies, jetty, mockito and javax.xml.stream and more patches because they FTBFS currently. >> I haven't tested all r-deps yet. The fix is easy but there might be >> other undetected issues, so I think an upload to experimental is preferable. > > What about patching bnd to also support the old '-foo' syntax in > addition to the new '--foo' form? That should be easy if the semantic > hasn't changed. Interesting idea but in my opinion we would only shift the issue to another package. Admittedly it could be theoretically fixed in one package but users might assume the old syntax is still valid and supported by upstream and this might create problems across different distributions when your Debian script suddenly doesn't work anymore on Arch Linux, Fedora or FreeBSD. It is also not just a problem with the new --foo form but also with the path to input and output directory. > There are 29 direct dependencies on bnd, plus 57 indirect ones through > libmaven-bundle-plugin-java, we'll have to test them all. If the > compatibility is good I think upgrading the existing bnd package is a > good idea, but if we get many issues we should probably create a new > package. I agree we need to be careful here and I assume there will be other build failures because bnd is frequently called in debian/rules. I don't see an ideal way yet to solve the problem because bnd 1.50.0 already FTBFS in sid and we have to patch this version to make it work with the latest osgi packages. The current version works with OSGi R4 bundles but my main intention was to support R5/R6 bundles. The update to osgi-core 6.0.0 was probably too early because bnd hasn't even implemented all new interfaces. But we are very early in the Stretch release cycle, so I presume they will catch up and release an updated version in the near future. We should also try to update bnd to version 2.4.0+ as soon as we have an up-to-date Gradle package in Debian. I'm not sure if we can support both, bnd 1.50.0 and bnd 2.1.0+, especially because they were intended for different OSGi specifications but I might be wrong. Regards, Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature