Bug#833193: RFS: chapel/1.15-1 [ITP]
Hi Lumin,
Thanks for your comments. See responses below.
> Hello guys,
>
> I quickly went through the packaging, and had some comments about it:
> (I didn't carefully read your previous discussion and I have no
> permission to upload)
>
> * debian/changelog:
> currently Debian is still in the deep freeze stage, I'd recommend
> you upload to experimental
> first. Besides, experimental is more fault-tolerant.
We plan to stick with sid per Sean's guidance.
> * chapel-doc.install:
> you may want to provide some room for users to install several
> versions of chapel at the
> same time, but I'd recommend the way similar to gcc/llvm packaging does.
> you may want to install stuff like this:
> /usr/share/doc/chapel/1.15/stuff
> /usr/share/doc/chapel/1.16/stuff
> but this should be better:
> /usr/share/doc/chapel-1.15/stuff
> /usr/share/doc/chapel-1.16/stuff
> for example:
> /usr/share/doc/gcc-{5,6}
We do install the Chapel modules and runtime to versioned directories
like this:
/usr/share/chapel/1.15/modules etc
The documentation is installed to
/usr/share/doc/chapel/1.15/rst etc
Is it obviously better in your opinion to use
/usr/share/chapel-1.15/modules
e.g.? If so, can you say why?
> * control:
> * Vcs-* fields are your *packaging repo* instead of upstream git repo.
OK, we'll update it.
> * python2.7: since python policy recommends python3 for new
> packages, could you please
> also provide a python3 version if upstream supports it?
The upstream project supports both Python 2.7 and Python 3.
Would it be sufficient to depend on Python >= 2.7?
I don't think it would make sense to update the scripts to
have a Python 3 shebang (like #!/usr/bin/env python3).
Do we assume that /usr/bin/env python returns a python 3 in
some cases?
> * rules:
> * dh compat 10 has parallel build as default, you can optionally
> bump compat to 10. Before
> you are really about to do that, check debhelper(7) first for the
> checklist from v9->v10.
Actually I tried changing it to 10 and ran in to issues. All of the
documentation I can find about actually creating Debian packages
says to use 9 and never change it.
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dother.en.html#compat
> * it seems that util/quickstart/setchplenv.bash is just exporting
> some environt variables
> for the use of buildsystem. exporting these variables in rules
> instead of sourcing with
> bash should be better, and in this way you can gain more control
> from rules, including
> the CHPL_LLVM flag which seems to be a key of one of your TODO.
We got it working that way as a temporary measure and intend
to change it as more Chapel packages are needed. However we don't
see anything wrong with doing it that way for now.
> This chapel 1.15 package was succesfully built on my laptop and a
> simple helloworld example is working.
Glad that it worked for you!
Best,
Ben
Reply to: