Hi Andreas, On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 09:28:19AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 07:13:20PM -0300, Tiago Bortoletto Vaz wrote: > > I'm trying to migrate brdesktop-* to blends-dev structure. Before reporting > > bugs/patches to BTS I would like to discuss some things here: > > > > 1) blends-dev doesn't support specifying archs for packages in > > Depends/Recommends. I've seen that Andreas wrote "...it is included for "all > > archs if available"" in tasks files, but this fails for our purpose. There > > are > > packages available for both i386 and amd64, but some can't go to our amd64 > > CD > > image due to the image size (it's bigger). Ok, I can manage it via > > live-helper, > > but it's a workaround I would not be happy with. I imagine it's a simple > > feature to implement. > > I have several remarks first: > > 1. I plan to rewrite blends-dev to create arch specific metapackages > before the freeze in December. Currently this is one major drawback > of blends-dev that we had to accept with the current build system because > otherwise we would have had to recreate debian/control file in the > build process while beeing online which is not acceptable in Debian > policy. I hope to get this solved soon. > > 2. Once the rewrite is done we might consider also specifying architectures > as you want. But you might also consider the "Avoids" field which is > described in > > > http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends/ap-DevelDescription.en.html#s-blends-dev > > I try to keep in mind the arch specification.
Good to know! > > 2) I think /usr/share/blends-dev/rules is repeating work which has been > > made in > > CDBS. CDBS provides a debhelper rules file very similar to the one from > > blends-dev. > > I learned in previous discussions that people mix up the common rules file > for blends with CDBS. While both try to hide common stuff from the user > by using shorter rules files this is the only similarity. CDBS is doing > much more than blends-dev and the comparison is not really valid. Sure CDBS does much more, but the fact is that blends rules is doing a work that is partially made in CDBS (eg. basic debhelper stuff). I think blends specific rules would perfectly fits as a CDBS class, so leaving the core to CDBS. It makes things easier for you and for blends which needs more flexibility in their rules. > > Also, some blends (like brdesktop) may want to use specific rules > > from CDBS (ex: makefile.mk) which seems to conflict with blends-dev rules. > > So, > > please consider having a blends.mk rules file in CDBS *only* for specific > > blends stuff rather than maintaining a full-featured rules file. > > What exactly do you want to use from makefile.mk? You should know that For now I need to scan my subdirs and perform a make $target for each one I find (makefile.mk does it for me). For the future I may want to use CDBS gnome rules or such. > you are perfectly free to ignore /usr/share/blends-dev/rules and rewrite > your own rules file instead of including the blends-dev rules. It is > just for your comfort and worked so far for all other blends. If you > are able to specify what exactly is needed I would try to realise this > in the common rules file for sure. Yes, I'm free to do it, and even to look for Makefiles by myself. The thing is the rules file from blends-dev is a nice feature which I would like to use, but it has actually been conflicting with other nice Debian features I also would be happy using :) I know it works for all other blends. The thing is we know brdesktop is quite different, but I think it's not a reason to ignore it in some blend-dev aspects. Brdesktop is not supposed to use a lot of blends-dev features (menus, user oriented stuff etc), so at least the core features should be available for it. > > 3) Please upload 0.6.4. > > I've got a report that cdd-dev (the compatibility package) to the old > packages does not install on a clean chroot system. I'd like to fix > this before I upload the next package. I hope to solve this over the > weekend. > > > We can't use our autobuilder before it since we use a > > cow chroot where we can't checkout the lastest svn revision. We need that > > version in Debian, which fixes that old debian-* requirement for blends > > name. > > Hope to get this done soon! > > > Btw, thanks for fixing it :) > > Sure! > > Kind regards and thanks for considering blends-dev Thank you! -- Tiago Bortoletto Vaz http://tiagovaz.org 0xA504FECA - http://pgp.mit.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
