Re: source management within APT
Es geschah am Freitag 13 Mai 2005 21:45 als martin f krafft schrieb:
> also sprach Christian Schoenebeck <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > My idea was to allow to explicitly define a list of packages in
> > a APT config file which should be compiled from source. That way
> > all other packages (that is the majority) are simply installed as
> > always - using a binary package. But for those explicity listed
> > packages, APT will compile them from source and install them
> > afterwards automatically. Further more, for every package there
> > should be a way in a APT config file to define compile time
> > options and pathes to patches we should be applied (for own,
> > custom patches).
> sounds like gentoo :)
No, it sounds better like Gentoo. Because APT could automatically manage
precompiled binary packages as well as custom (from source) compiled packages
seamlessly together with one tool and operation.
> Well check out apt-build and apt-get source --compile. Also debaux
> looks exactly like what you want, although it's not integrated into
> APT the way you like it.
Well, debaux is not what I'm looking for. That's more a convenience and
quality ensurance tool for package maintainers, not for end users.
apt-build looks nice, but I think it's better to integrate source management
directly into apt-get, because that way you can use precompiled and custom
compiled packages automatically and transparently with one tool. That is you
don't have to e.g. upgrade your binary-only packages and then upgrade your
custom-built packages separately. In fact, I guess that separation might even
be a problem under certain dependencies.
Another feature I really would like to see is to have patches automatically
generated. Consider you have a build tree with all the sources, you simply
edit one of the sources in the build directory and APT will then
automatically diff the changes you made and store it as a patch in a patch
directory. On version upgrades the sources in the source tree might
completely be replaced and APT will then (re)apply your custom, automatically
generated patches against the new sources (or at least try so).
> Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
But I do not. CC appreciated. I wasn't even aware this was a public list.
Maybe due to the odd name of this list.
Btw many source packages from Testing/Sarge do not compile right away.
Shouldn't a serious bug report opened against each of those packages?