Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google
I spent a while working on it off and on, but there is a decent amount
of tweaking and other packaging work needed to get policy-compliant
bazel packages. (E.G: There are quite a few binary JAR files shipped
in the upstream tarball that don't necessarily match the versions in
Debian).
I just didn't have the spare time, especially now that I have a kid,
to sink into one package.
(Also, FWIW, if you want to _create_ policy-compliant packages using
bazel, there is a lot more work than just getting a policy-compliant
bazel package, because bazel needs to understand debian multiarch
compilers, standard build flags, etc).
Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Chris Lamb <lamby@debian.org> wrote:
> Chris Lamb wrote:
>
>> Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>
>> > > Well, if you could package Bazel… :)
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, there's more work than just "packaging" Bazel. Just to
>> > package Bazel, the open issues are:
>>
>> […]
>>
>> Oh! My smiley was meant to represent how packaging Bazel is not a simple
>> task and thus imply you were delaying for no obvious reason! Apologies
>> that did not come across via email.
>>
>> > But... even with that, Bazel cannot be used to _build_ a Debian
>> > package, because it does not create Debian-policy-compliant binaries
>>
>> Oh, can you elaborate on this?
>>
>> > [...]
>>
>> Thanks so much for clarifying the other issues; very useful for myself
>> and for others coming across this bug report.
>>
>> If your opinionn should, for example, Roughtime try and rewrite the build
>> system in the meantime/long-term?
>
> Gentle ping on this?
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> --
> ,''`.
> : :' : Chris Lamb
> `. `'` lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
> `-
Reply to: