Re: [jitsi-dev] Jitsi in Debian
+debian-mentors for more comments/help
Hi, thanks a lot for the information and pointers! The documentation on why you're bundling various source packages is very useful. I see you also have a similar setup in https://github.com/jitsi/libjitsi/tree/master/resources/install/debian
I've played around with the build processes and have some comments:
1. You're only building a .orig.tar.gz, but Debian source packages require a .dsc (source package description file) and a .debian.tar.gz (debian packaging contents). After you create a full debian source package that includes all three files, you can then get rid of all of the "debian binary package" stuff from your build.xml scripts, and use the proper debian developer tools instead (e.g. dpkg-buildpackage, etc.
2. In both libjitsi and jitsi: you build up a tmp directory that contains all the sources for a debian package, out of which you build a .orig.tar.gz, but then clean (delete) the whole directory, without trying to create .dsc or .debian.tar.gz from the other files.
3. After applying the patches from [1] below, and running "ant deb-src -Dlabel=XXXX"[*], then moving the .orig.tar.gz to the same directory as the temporary jitsi/libjitsi source tree, I can run `debuild -S` inside the temporary source tree. This is the *correct way* to make Debian packages. However, the process fails, for both libjitsi and jitsi. See [2] and [3].
The TL;DR is that it looks like your debian/patches/ are out-of-date, and I'm not familiar enough with the code base, to spend the time right now to debug it.
So I wonder, who has been generating the .dsc/.debian.tar.gz files that you've been submitting to Debian FTP? I have been unable to create one myself from your git repos.
In fact, it is better to keep the debian packaging files (i.e. debian/*) in a separate repo, in the top-level directory of the repo. Then, one can generate .orig.tar.gz from the main jitsi/libjitsi repos every release, then import them to the Debian packaging repos. This is a very standard pattern for Debian packaging, supporting by the git-buildpackage tool, see for example [4] where it says "Imported Upstream version" etc. This would be cleaner and cheaper than effectively re-implementing (and maintaining) the Debian toolchain in build.xml.
> AFAIK the reason why libjitsi is/was blocked is the license for the javax.sdp/javax.sip API files
Do you have some more details on that?
X
[4] https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-privacy/packages/flashproxy.git/log/
========================
1. Patches for build.xml
========================
Patches are on top of respective HEAD commits at 2015-10-17
jisti: only clean artefacts in "clean" targets to allow post-build inspection
================================================================================
diff --git a/resources/install/build.xml b/resources/install/build.xml
index 3922296..0eadfaf 100644
--- a/resources/install/build.xml
+++ b/resources/install/build.xml
@@ -2501,7 +2501,7 @@
<!-- clean for deb-src -->
<target name="clean-deb-src">
- <delete dir="${debian.tmp.dir}/${package.name}-${sip-communicator.version}" />
+ <delete dir="${debian.tmp.dir}"/>
</target>
<!-- copies jitsi source to ${target.dir},
@@ -2573,7 +2573,7 @@
- libjitsi
-->
<target name="deb-src"
- depends="init,version,load-properties,clean-deb-src,dpkg-build-warning"
+ depends="init,version,load-properties,dpkg-build-warning"
if="dpkg.build.present"
description="Create a .deb package for Debian (needs dpkg utilities)">
@@ -2708,7 +2708,6 @@
<tar destfile="${debian.dir}/${package.name}_${sip-communicator.version}.orig.tar.gz"
compression="gzip"
basedir="${debian.tmp.dir}"/>
- <delete dir="${debian.tmp.dir}"/>
</target>
<!-- clean for debuild -->
================================================================================
libjisti: only clean artefacts in "clean" targets to allow post-build inspection
================================================================================
diff --git a/resources/install/build-debian.xml b/resources/install/build-debian.xml
index 8c1a020..f0dc711 100644
--- a/resources/install/build-debian.xml
+++ b/resources/install/build-debian.xml
@@ -11,9 +11,6 @@
<tar destfile="${dist}/libjitsi_${build.label}.orig.tar.gz"
compression="gzip"
basedir="${tmp}"/>
- <delete failonerror="false" includeemptydirs="true">
- <fileset dir="${tmp}"/>
- </delete>
</target>
<target name="deb-copy-libjitsi">
@@ -187,7 +184,9 @@
</target>
<target name="clean-debuild">
-
+ <delete failonerror="false" includeemptydirs="true">
+ <fileset dir="${tmp}"/>
+ </delete>
<delete failonerror="false">
<fileset dir="lib">
<include name="*.jar"/>
================================================================================
=========================
2. debuild -S on libjitsi
=========================
# after patching and running `ant deb-src -Dlabel=9999`, and moving the built .orig.tar.gz to the correct location listed below
# I don't know what label to use here
libjitsi.git/tmp/libjitsi$ ls -1 ..
libjitsi/
libjitsi_9999.orig.tar.gz
libjitsi.git/tmp/libjitsi$ debuild -S
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -d -us -uc -S
dpkg-buildpackage: source package libjitsi
dpkg-buildpackage: source version 9999
dpkg-buildpackage: source distribution unstable
dpkg-buildpackage: source changed by Damian Minkov <damencho@jitsi.org>
dpkg-source --before-build libjitsi
dpkg-source: info: applying bouncycastle-1.49.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying bouncycastle-1.51.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying remove-hflip
can't find file to patch at input line 6
Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|Description: Removes hflip, filters internal api availbale in ffmpeg but not in libav
|Index: libjitsi/lib/src/jitsi-lgpl-dependencies/src/native/ffmpeg/org_jitsi_impl_neomedia_codec_FFmpeg.c
|===================================================================
|--- libjitsi.orig/lib/src/jitsi-lgpl-dependencies/src/native/ffmpeg/org_jitsi_impl_neomedia_codec_FFmpeg.c
|+++ libjitsi/lib/src/jitsi-lgpl-dependencies/src/native/ffmpeg/org_jitsi_impl_neomedia_codec_FFmpeg.c
--------------------------
No file to patch. Skipping patch.
8 out of 8 hunks ignored
can't find file to patch at input line 111
Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|Index: libjitsi/lib/src/jitsi-lgpl-dependencies/src/native/ffmpeg/org_jitsi_impl_neomedia_codec_FFmpeg.h
|===================================================================
|--- libjitsi.orig/lib/src/jitsi-lgpl-dependencies/src/native/ffmpeg/org_jitsi_impl_neomedia_codec_FFmpeg.h
|+++ libjitsi/lib/src/jitsi-lgpl-dependencies/src/native/ffmpeg/org_jitsi_impl_neomedia_codec_FFmpeg.h
--------------------------
No file to patch. Skipping patch.
7 out of 7 hunks ignored
patching file src/org/jitsi/impl/neomedia/MediaServiceImpl.java
Hunk #1 succeeded at 1156 (offset 33 lines).
patching file src/org/jitsi/impl/neomedia/device/VideoMediaDeviceSession.java
Hunk #1 succeeded at 523 (offset 10 lines).
dpkg-source: info: the patch has fuzz which is not allowed, or is malformed
dpkg-source: info: if patch 'remove-hflip' is correctly applied by quilt, use 'quilt refresh' to update it
dpkg-source: info: restoring quilt backup files for remove-hflip
dpkg-source: error: LC_ALL=C patch -t -F 0 -N -p1 -u -V never -E -b -B .pc/remove-hflip/ --reject-file=- < libjitsi/debian/patches/remove-hflip gave error exit status 1
dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-source --before-build libjitsi gave error exit status 2
debuild: fatal error at line 1374:
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -d -us -uc -S failed
29
======================
3. debuild -S on jitsi
======================
# after patching and running `ant deb-src -Dlabel=5478`, and moving the built .orig.tar.gz to the location listed below
# The label is the latest one here: http://bluejimp.com/jitsi/changelogs/ and `ant deb-src` downloads the relevant file from here
jitsi.git/release/debian/tmp/jitsi-2.9.5478$ ls -1 ..
jitsi-2.9.5478/
jitsi_2.9.5478-1_source.build
jitsi_2.9.5478.orig.tar.gz
jitsi.git/release/debian/tmp/jitsi-2.9.5478$ debuild -S
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -d -us -uc -S
dpkg-buildpackage: source package jitsi
dpkg-buildpackage: source version 2.9.5478-1
dpkg-buildpackage: source distribution unstable
dpkg-buildpackage: source changed by Damian Minkov <damencho@jitsi.org>
dpkg-source --before-build jitsi-2.9.5478
dpkg-source: info: applying bcprov-upgrade-1.48
dpkg-source: info: applying removes-gdata-deps
dpkg-source: info: applying encoding.patch
dpkg-source: info: applying bouncycastle-1.51.patch
dpkg-source: error: LC_ALL=C patch -t -F 0 -N -p1 -u -V never -E -b -B .pc/bouncycastle-1.51.patch/ --reject-file=- < jitsi-2.9.5478/debian/patches/bouncycastle-1.51.patch gave error exit status 1
can't find file to patch at input line 6
Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|Description: Removes import that is only available in bouncycastle 1.51.
|Index: jitsi/src/net/java/sip/communicator/impl/libjitsi/libjitsi.manifest.mf
|===================================================================
|--- jitsi.orig/src/net/java/sip/communicator/impl/libjitsi/libjitsi.manifest.mf
|+++ jitsi/src/net/java/sip/communicator/impl/libjitsi/libjitsi.manifest.mf
--------------------------
No file to patch. Skipping patch.
1 out of 1 hunk ignored
dpkg-source: info: the patch has fuzz which is not allowed, or is malformed
dpkg-source: info: if patch 'bouncycastle-1.51.patch' is correctly applied by quilt, use 'quilt refresh' to update it
dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-source --before-build jitsi-2.9.5478 gave error exit status 2
debuild: fatal error at line 1374:
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -d -us -uc -S failed
29
On 13/10/15 17:09, Damian Minkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> all the packaging is under
> https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi/tree/master/resources/install/debian
> We are using ant to generate the source package which can be used to
> build jitsi latter for debian, cause the project has many jar and
> binary dependencies and cannot be used as is, we embed some of the
> sources inside the src package and modify some bundles that can make
> use of the debian already installed dependencies, rather the bundled
> jars. We also generate to types of debian package, one is the source
> which I mention and the other one we call binary, we just use the jars
> and natives that are currently committed to the repo to build a
> package which our users use directly from our repo.
>
> We have put a lot of effort in the debian packaging for some time, but
> at least twice we had the packages deleted from mentors site, due to
> no activity and no interest.
> Maybe the work will got easier when some of the packages we used to
> embed are pushed to debian or maven.
> If you need some assistance for the current state and kicking out I
> can help, just drop me a note.
>
> Regards
> damencho
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Ingo Bauersachs <ingo@jitsi.org> wrote:
>>> Any update on my previous email? The offer to help with packaging still
>>> stands.
>>
>> I don't remember any previous mail, so that might have gotten lost somewhere. As you might know (or maybe not) Bluejimp got acquired by Atlassian and the main focus now lies on Jitsi Meet. So any help with packaging would be appreciated. This mostly would be with dependent packages though. AFAIK the reason why libjitsi is/was blocked is the license for the javax.sdp/javax.sip API files. DD Daniel Pocock reimplemented them cleanly and we need to start using them and then they need to be packaged and uploaded to Debian too.
>>
>>> I am emailing this address dev@jitsi.org because this is listed as the
>>> Maintainer: for the current jitsi package, in debian/control. This address is
>>> used by Debian infrastructure [1] to send out bug reports and other automatic
>>> notifications, as well as a point-of-contact for developers and users to
>>> contact you about the package.
>>>
>>> However, I see that my previous message (written in September) wasn't
>>> delivered to the mailing list [2]. I also notice that Debian bug reports for
>>> Jitsi, e.g. [3] haven't been delivered to the mailing list [4], but some
>>> other Debian notices have [5].
>>
>> E-Mail addresses that aren't subscribed to the list are being moderated. This is obviously bad for automated mails from the bugtracker. The ones that got through were probably manually allowed, just like this message. I'll see if I can somehow whitelist *.debian.org once I get access to mailman.
>>
>>> Are your moderators selectively dropping messages? If so, please consider
>>> using a different email address for your Maintainers: field in
>>> debian/control, that accepts all relevant messages. It's not responsible to
>>> ignore questions from your users.
>>
>> Using any other address for that field will bring even less attention to mails going there :(
>>
>>> X
>>
>> Ingo
>>
>>> [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#s-maintainer
>>> [2] http://lists.jitsi.org/pipermail/dev/2015-September/thread.html
>>> [3] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=789038
>>> [4] http://lists.jitsi.org/pipermail/dev/2015-June/thread.html
>>> [5] http://lists.jitsi.org/pipermail/dev/2015-June/024411.html
>>>
>>> On 18/09/15 00:45, Ximin Luo wrote:
>>>> Hi Jitsi Team,
>>>>
>>>> Some of us at the Tor Project are exploring options for voice conferences.
>>> We heard some nice things about Jitsi, but noticed that it's not quite yet in
>>> Debian:
>>>>
>>>> https://packages.debian.org/sid/jitsi
>>>>
>>>> The issue appears to be that libjitsi, a dependency of jitsi, has been
>>>> rejected from Debian a few times:
>>>>
>>>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=789038
>>>>
>>>> When the Debian FTP masters rejected your package, they would have sent you
>>> an email on why. Could you enlighten us on the reason? A few of us (at Tor,
>>> that is) are also Debian Developers, so could help you with these issues, as
>>> well as sponsor your next upload.
>>>>
>>>> Could you also publish the Debian packaging in a git repository somewhere?
>>> You can then add Vcs-Browser: and Vcs-Git: fields to debian/control, for
>>> others to find and contribute.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Ximin
>>>>
--
GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE
git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git
Reply to: