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

Re: Any progress with FIS GT.M?



Hi Luis,

Great to hear that we are almost there.  Next step actually would be to
make sure it builds "correct" binary packages in a clean
environment (e.g. using pbuilder or cowbuilder).  Last time I have tried
(22nd of June), and that was the same 5.5-000+git104-g4077ab8 the
resultant .deb's were lacking executable permissions on all binaries...
we also need assure suid root on
./usr/lib/fis-gtm/V5.5-000_x86_64/gtmsecshr and chmod 700
./usr/lib/fis-gtm/V5.5-000_x86_64/gtmsecshrdir to match upstream's
"fortification" effort.

using pbuilder  or cowbuilder is plain easy when you have .dsc source
package already... pretty much in simplest case:

cowbuilder --create         # to be done once to create clean env
cowbuilder --build bla.dsc  # to build source package into binaries

also change back to debian/compat 9 (am I repeating myself? ;) so I just
did it ;-) ) to get advantage of security fortification compile
flags out of the box

Cheers,

On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, Luis Ibanez wrote:

>    Hi Andreas,

>    On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:19 AM, Andreas Tille <[1]andreas@an3as.eu>
>    wrote:

>      So please let me rephrase what needs to be done:
>       1. Check out orig source using
>            make -f debian/rules get-orig-source

>    Yes.
>    This will bring you the sources from the github repository.
>    (I presume that at some point, Bhaskar and/or Amul will
>    bless that code base, and maybe put it in a tar file in their
>    sourceforge distribution.  I know that Amul was already
>    moving some of the changes to their upstream version.
>    In any case: Yes. the command (1) will bring you the sources
>    in two tar files named:
>    fis-gtm_5.5-000+git104-g4077ab8-1.debian.tar.gz
>    fis-gtm_5.5-000+git104-g4077ab8.orig.tar.gz
>     

>       2. Use Build stuff in SVN to build the package

>    Yes.
>     
>    I have been doing this with "debuild"
>    and have been adding "-d" because we are 
>    using a very recent version of cmake (2.8.8).
>    I'm not sure how that affects the build in a 
>    controlled environment...

>      Is this correct?  If yes I'd be very happy to do this and upload.

>    Thanks,
>    We will be crossing fingers  !    :-)
>     

>      Question: It seems development is strongly focussed on Git.  It might
>      sound natural to move the packaging also into Debian Med git.  Do you
>      agree and if yes do we want to do this step before we upload or after? 

>    We could go either way.
>    Whatever is more consistent with Debian practices.
>     

>      Also if yes: If you regard the history of packaging as relevant would
>      you volunteer to move the packaging in SVN to Git (I'm no Git expert
>      I would only follow the instructions to create a new repository)?

>    I'm happy to help do this, just may need some guidance / mentoring.
>    on Debian Med Git rules.
>    Regarding the history... I don't think that we want to keep it for the 
>    long run. Most of the work went into the CMakeLists.txt file, and that 
>    was Brad and Amul working together. There was a lot of trial and
>    error experimentation in it.
>    Of course, Brad and/or Amul may have other preferences here.
>    I'm happy to defer to them on whether we want to keep the history.
>         Luis

> References

>    Visible links
>    1. mailto:andreas@an3as.eu

-- 
Yaroslav O. Halchenko
Postdoctoral Fellow,   Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences
Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755
Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834                       Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419
WWW:   http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik        


Reply to: