Hi

On 11 July 2012 12:49, Jeroen Demeyer <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2012-07-11 11:33, Jan Groenewald wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On 11 July 2012 11:24, Andrea Lazzarotto <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Well, maybe I didn't understand properly your "they"... did you mean
> >     the final users or the Launchpad system?
> >
> > Launchpad "builds", yes. Usually source. In our case a debian package
> > wrapped around a binary. So "building" is midleading.
> Why "in our case a Debian package wrapped around a binary"?  What's the
> point of that?  If Launchpad builds, why not actually build on Launchpad?
>
>
Because even a monolithic from-source fails to build.

debuild has many rules and requirements. It does not just run make.
It bombs out on adding -Wsymbolic to the maxima install. I did not even
get much further.

I opted to make a binary package instead, because I could finish that
quickly.

When launchpad "builds" my package, it is spending about an hour and a half
untarring and uncompressing and retarring and recompressing the amd64 and
i686 binaries I got from sagemath.org (those built by the current sage
buildbot network).
It never compiles code, because I disabled that in the debian/rules file,
because
this was the quick and easy way to a package management system the way
I need it: signed, update-able, and through the official package manager
for Ubuntu.


>  > Also launchpad is a buildfarm, but is not supposed to be used as a
> buildbot,
> > as your packages are supposed to be built and tested using debian
> > development
> > tools.
>


> I don't understand the difference between "buildfarm" and "buildbot",
> unless you mean that buildbot should also *test* while the buildfarm
> doesn't.
>

Launchpad's build farm (hardware and software) is intended to build
*packages* after you have
tested building the *code* on your own hardware. It does usually compile
your code again in a
clean environment, but it's intention is to produce a package, not to test
your code compilation.
It is also testing installation of build dependencies, of runtime
dependencies, etc.

Sage's Buildbot (software) is meant to build *code* (and binaries), but not
to make a package
for any particular distribution's package management.

Regards,
Jan


-- 
  .~.
  /V\     Jan Groenewald
 /( )\    www.aims.ac.za
 ^^-^^

-- 
-- 
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org

Reply via email to