Hi Grant, You wrote: > 1) Are the python --> python2.6 changes required (or recommended)? I > ask because we use that control file to build on Hardy, Intrepid and > Jaunty, and so there would have to be a branch in svn if the > dependencies were different on the 3 platforms.
Good question. You said in an earlier email that you couldn't get the python2.5-built PyLucene to work with the python2.6 environment in Jaunty. So I assumed that by building PyLucene in my package in the python2.6 environment, it would not work with 2.5. I don't know if this is a good assumption or not. Since PyLucene is built as part of the package with the given debian/ directory, the control file should list the dependencies for PyLucene, also. I would imagine that in a proper packaging scheme, PyLucene would be in its own library package, it would have its dependencies, and the chandler package would then be python2.x agnostic. At the very least though, I do believe that the dependency should be python (<< 3.0). The Python folks have said that 2.x code won't work as-is in 3.0. > 2) I'm not an expert on packaging, so I'm not sure if the fakeroot and > svn-buildpackage dependencies are required. They are needed for > creating .debs, but probably there are other ways of building/ > extracting packages? This is the first package I've built, and I'm just starting to read up on how to create packages and the Debian/Ubuntu policy. So I'm far from an expert! >From what I've read so far, fakeroot is needed to make a .deb in any case when you do not want to do the build as the superuser root. So I guess it's not strictly required. The same probably goes for svn-buildpackage: not strictly required, but very useful. I just put those in there to document all of the dependencies in one place. Again, I'm sure this will all be fixed up in the official packaging. > 3) You're right about the openjdk-6-* dependencies: I guess we were > setting the bar lower than we thought :P. Yeah, the versions for the openjdk-6 dependencies seemed wrong. However, I think a bigger concern is requiring openjdk specifically. Perhaps it's okay when building. But there are a few different java runtimes out there. I personally prefer the sun-java6-jre. Depending on one of the virtual packages like java5-runtime or java6-runtime might be a better choice. I'm assuming that this is a dependency of Lucene. (Do we need Java for any other component?) Lucene and PyLucene are going to be interesting. There is already a liblucene2-java package in Debian and Ubuntu. I'm guessing, but is PyLucene just a wrapper around that, exposing the Java interface to Python? There is also a pylucene project in Debian and Ubuntu. So maybe the trick is to get the maintainer of the pylucene package to use the liblucene2-java package. I really don't know how this is going to work. The dependencies that we must still build from external/ are going to be our biggest challenge. > 4) Yes, the version.py file doesn't pick up the svn version > automatically (it's tweaked by hand when creating new svn branches for > builds). There is currently code to figure out the version from > the .svn directory (if one is present); maybe there's a way to do the > same thing for a file installed of a debian package. For now, I can probably just make a patch file to change version.py if I make any more private builds of trunk. There is a lot in that control file that should not make it back into the repository. As I said, I'm still at the beginning of the learning curve. For instance, I noticed in my build log that the version of twisted that setuptools looks for is >= 8.1.0. I put (>= 8.2.0) in the Depends because that's what we have in external/. Also, I just learned today that there is a tool called pbuilder that creates a minimal chroot environment that has only packages marked Essential and the build tools. I probably should start building our packages there to ensure that we don't have bad dependencies. And now another question. I noticed this evening that at least one other person has asked in chandler-users for a Jaunty build of 1.0.3. Should we do a 1.0.3.1 release for Jaunty, just so that folks have something that can be run? Right now, we have no publicly available package for that distribution. Matt _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
