Re: Mpich 1/2/3

[Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>]

Hi Anton!

I've made many updates to the mpich package, mostly related to lintian 
warnings and errors.

However, I have a question concerning multiarch and update-alternatives:

In libmpich-dev.postinst, update-alternatives requires the library file 
paths as arguments. These paths include DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH, so the 
command dpkg-architecture is needed. So it seems that libmpich-dev must 
depend on dpkg-dev to solve this problem? Is this acceptable, or is 
there some another solution?

At the moment, four errors related to update-alternatives occur when 
installing libmpich-dev, because the paths given in 
libmpich-dev.postinst is incorrect.

Best regards
Torquil Sørensen

On 19/06/13 22:09, Anton Gladky wrote:
> Hi Torquil,
>
> mpich is almost ready to be "multiarched". Please, fix some
> lintian warnings and errors. Some of them I have fixed already.
>
> Also we will need to build all build-rdeps to check, whether
> they are happy with updated package.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Anotn
>
> 2013/6/18 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>:
> > That sounds great! I'm going camping for a few days, but I'll be able to
> > test it this weekend.
> >
> > Torquil
> >
> >
> > On 18/06/13 22:15, Anton Gladky wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have done some commits into mpich2-directory. Please, check
> > > it out and test. I am planning to make a couple of more within the next
> > > few days. We should prepare for the renaming.
> > >
> > > Anton
> > >
> > > 2013/5/28 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>:
> > > > Hi Anton!
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I would appreciate the help, so that is very kind of you.
> > > >
> > > > Btw, your second point (regarding dh) is something we had planned. But
> > > > even
> > > > though the package has potential for improvement in several places, my
> > > > personal plan was to not do everything at once, in order to prevent
> > > > several
> > > > problems appearing simulaneously. The name change in addition to
> > > > inclusion
> > > > of the NMU in the changelog was enough of a worry for me at the moment
> > > > :-)
> > > >
> > > > But if someone more experienced could help I would be glad to work on
> > > > more
> > > > improvements simultaneously. Actually, I have been doing some work on
> > > > moving
> > > > it to dh locally, but thought I would delay it until after the change of
> > > > name has gone through without too many problems.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding the change of name, I don't really have a strong opinion on the
> > > > matter. Replacing mpich2 with a good mpich3 package in Debian is my main
> > > > goal right now.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > > Torquil Sørensen
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 26/05/13 23:31, Anton Gladky wrote:
> > > > > Torquil, some suggestions on packaging:
> > > > > I think it is better:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) to use compat-level 9
> > > > > 2) dh instead of cdbs, debian/rules will be shorter and more clear in
> > > > > this
> > > > > case;
> > > > > 3) copyright-file in DEP-5 format;
> > > > > 4) DEP-3 for patches
> > > > > 5) postinst and prerm scripts should be inspected.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want, I can try to help with some of points.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Anton
> > > > >
> > > > > 2013/5/26 Torquil Macdonald Sørensen <torquil@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > Yes, I have uploaded the mpich 3.0.3 sources to the upstream branch in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > git repository, as well as made some changes in debian/ to make it
> > > > > > work.
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > might have a few more small changes, though, in addition to uploading
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > 3.0.4 upstream sources which are now available. E.g. perhaps upping the
> > > > > > Debian standards version and including an earlier NMU upload in the
> > > > > > changelog.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have changed the source name to mpich in the git repository, and have
> > > > > > also
> > > > > > added a few dummy transitional packages since the binary packages will
> > > > > > also
> > > > > > change names a bit due to the name change and due to an increase in the
> > > > > > library soname.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Despite the fact that the existence of the transitional packages seems
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > give a smooth upgrade on my system, I am of course not 100% sure that
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > scheme I have deviced is optimal, since this is a bit new to me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards
> > > > > > Torquil Sørensen