Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Olek Wojnar]

Philipp and Bastien,

Thank you both for your responses!

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:23 PM Bastien ROUCARIES <
roucaries.bast...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Upstream seems to be friendly
>
> Time to prod them:
> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/9408


Thanks for highlighting that. It indeed seems that they will likely realize
the importance of their software right now and help. Pinged. :) [1]


> On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:57 PM Philipp Kern  wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-04-08 19:43, Olek Wojnar wrote:
> > >
> > > In the meantime, I see that Bazel has an unofficial Ubuntu build [1].
> > > Do you know anything about that? It seems like a good place for us to
> > > start if you aren't close to a product yourself.
> >
> > That's the build Google provides that is built with Bazel itself, using
> > a ton of vendored libraries. (Because that's how Google operates
> > internally.)
>

Ah, ok. Good to know. Thanks. Might be better to just start with a vanilla
source package then. I'm playing around with it just to see what I can get
working while we wait for a reply to my ping on Bastien's GitHub issue.


> > Generally the pkg_deb output[1] is not really policy-compliant and more
> > built from the ground up without any Debian tooling. So the /mere
> > existence/ of that package (which was there from the beginning) does not
> > help the quest of getting Bazel packaged for Debian, unfortunately.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Philipp Kern, obviously not speaking for Google
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/f828b4c77805ad0ea6afecef798aa69d68bec8d4/scripts/packages/debian/BUILD#L69


Well that's not as encouraging as I'd hoped but still good information to
have. Sounds like our best shot for getting something working in the
near-term is active cooperation and support from Google. Here's hoping they
support that!!

-Olek

Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Bastien ROUCARIES]

Upstream seems to be friendly

Time to prod them:
https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/9408

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 10:57 PM Philipp Kern  wrote:
>
> On 2020-04-08 19:43, Olek Wojnar wrote:
> > Bazel has suddenly become more important because it is preventing us
> > from getting packages working that would help with the COVID-19
> > pandemic. Due to the significance, I am copying the Debian Med team as
> > well as key people from this bug's history in the hopes of getting
> > something moving quickly.
> >
> > On Tue, 22 May 2018 14:55:19 -0600 Kyle Moffett 
> > wrote:
> >> I spent a while working on it off and on, but there is a decent amount
> >> of tweaking and other packaging work needed to get policy-compliant
> >> bazel packages.  (E.G: There are quite a few binary JAR files shipped
> >> in the upstream tarball that don't necessarily match the versions in
> >> Debian).
> >>
> >> I just didn't have the spare time, especially now that I have a kid,
> >> to sink into one package.
> >
> > I can relate to the kid/time issues! ;) Have you had any time to work
> > on it recently? Did you ever upload any of your work?
> >
> > In the meantime, I see that Bazel has an unofficial Ubuntu build [1].
> > Do you know anything about that? It seems like a good place for us to
> > start if you aren't close to a product yourself.
>
> That's the build Google provides that is built with Bazel itself, using
> a ton of vendored libraries. (Because that's how Google operates
> internally.)
>
> Generally the pkg_deb output[1] is not really policy-compliant and more
> built from the ground up without any Debian tooling. So the /mere
> existence/ of that package (which was there from the beginning) does not
> help the quest of getting Bazel packaged for Debian, unfortunately.
>
> Kind regards
> Philipp Kern, obviously not speaking for Google
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/f828b4c77805ad0ea6afecef798aa69d68bec8d4/scripts/packages/debian/BUILD#L69

Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Philipp Kern]

On 2020-04-08 19:43, Olek Wojnar wrote:
Bazel has suddenly become more important because it is preventing us 
from getting packages working that would help with the COVID-19 
pandemic. Due to the significance, I am copying the Debian Med team as 
well as key people from this bug's history in the hopes of getting 
something moving quickly.


On Tue, 22 May 2018 14:55:19 -0600 Kyle Moffett  
wrote:

I spent a while working on it off and on, but there is a decent amount
of tweaking and other packaging work needed to get policy-compliant
bazel packages.  (E.G: There are quite a few binary JAR files shipped
in the upstream tarball that don't necessarily match the versions in
Debian).

I just didn't have the spare time, especially now that I have a kid,
to sink into one package.


I can relate to the kid/time issues! ;) Have you had any time to work 
on it recently? Did you ever upload any of your work?


In the meantime, I see that Bazel has an unofficial Ubuntu build [1]. 
Do you know anything about that? It seems like a good place for us to 
start if you aren't close to a product yourself.


That's the build Google provides that is built with Bazel itself, using 
a ton of vendored libraries. (Because that's how Google operates 
internally.)


Generally the pkg_deb output[1] is not really policy-compliant and more 
built from the ground up without any Debian tooling. So the /mere 
existence/ of that package (which was there from the beginning) does not 
help the quest of getting Bazel packaged for Debian, unfortunately.


Kind regards
Philipp Kern, obviously not speaking for Google

[1] 
https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/blob/f828b4c77805ad0ea6afecef798aa69d68bec8d4/scripts/packages/debian/BUILD#L69

Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Olek Wojnar]

Hi Kyle, (or other interested/involved parties)

Bazel has suddenly become more important because it is preventing us from
getting packages working that would help with the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to
the significance, I am copying the Debian Med team as well as key people
from this bug's history in the hopes of getting something moving quickly.

On Tue, 22 May 2018 14:55:19 -0600 Kyle Moffett 
wrote:
> I spent a while working on it off and on, but there is a decent amount
> of tweaking and other packaging work needed to get policy-compliant
> bazel packages.  (E.G: There are quite a few binary JAR files shipped
> in the upstream tarball that don't necessarily match the versions in
> Debian).
>
> I just didn't have the spare time, especially now that I have a kid,
> to sink into one package.

I can relate to the kid/time issues! ;) Have you had any time to work on it
recently? Did you ever upload any of your work?

In the meantime, I see that Bazel has an unofficial Ubuntu build [1]. Do
you know anything about that? It seems like a good place for us to start if
you aren't close to a product yourself.

Oh, and to state this explicitly: I'm happy to work on this if it'll help
it get into Debian faster! I just don't want to step on anyone's toes if
someone has already made significant progress on this ITP.

-Olek

[1]
https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/install-ubuntu.html#install-on-ubuntu

Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Kyle Moffett]

I spent a while working on it off and on, but there is a decent amount
of tweaking and other packaging work needed to get policy-compliant
bazel packages.  (E.G: There are quite a few binary JAR files shipped
in the upstream tarball that don't necessarily match the versions in
Debian).

I just didn't have the spare time, especially now that I have a kid,
to sink into one package.

(Also, FWIW, if you want to _create_ policy-compliant packages using
bazel, there is a lot more work than just getting a policy-compliant
bazel package, because bazel needs to understand debian multiarch
compilers, standard build flags, etc).

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett


On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Chris Lamb  wrote:
> Chris Lamb wrote:
>
>> Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>
>> > > Well, if you could package Bazel… :)
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, there's more work than just "packaging" Bazel.  Just to
>> > package Bazel, the open issues are:
>>
>> […]
>>
>> Oh! My smiley was meant to represent how packaging Bazel is not a simple
>> task and thus imply you were delaying for no obvious reason! Apologies
>> that did not come across via email.
>>
>> > But... even with that, Bazel cannot be used to _build_ a Debian
>> > package, because it does not create Debian-policy-compliant binaries
>>
>> Oh, can you elaborate on this?
>>
>> > [...]
>>
>> Thanks so much for clarifying the other issues; very useful for myself
>> and for others coming across this bug report.
>>
>> If your opinionn should, for example, Roughtime try and rewrite the build
>> system in the meantime/long-term?
>
> Gentle ping on this?
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> --
>   ,''`.
>  : :'  : Chris Lamb
>  `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
>`-

Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Chris Lamb]

Chris Lamb wrote:

> Kyle Moffett wrote:
> 
> > > Well, if you could package Bazel… :)
> > 
> > Unfortunately, there's more work than just "packaging" Bazel.  Just to
> > package Bazel, the open issues are:
> 
> […]
> 
> Oh! My smiley was meant to represent how packaging Bazel is not a simple
> task and thus imply you were delaying for no obvious reason! Apologies
> that did not come across via email.
> 
> > But... even with that, Bazel cannot be used to _build_ a Debian
> > package, because it does not create Debian-policy-compliant binaries
> 
> Oh, can you elaborate on this?
> 
> > [...]
> 
> Thanks so much for clarifying the other issues; very useful for myself
> and for others coming across this bug report.
> 
> If your opinionn should, for example, Roughtime try and rewrite the build
> system in the meantime/long-term?

Gentle ping on this?


Best wishes,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-

Bug#782654: Bug#838416: Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Chris Lamb]

Kyle Moffett wrote:

> > Well, if you could package Bazel… :)
> 
> Unfortunately, there's more work than just "packaging" Bazel.  Just to
> package Bazel, the open issues are:

[…]

Oh! My smiley was meant to represent how packaging Bazel is not a simple
task and thus imply you were delaying for no obvious reason! Apologies
that did not come across via email.

> But... even with that, Bazel cannot be used to _build_ a Debian
> package, because it does not create Debian-policy-compliant binaries

Oh, can you elaborate on this?

> [...]

Thanks so much for clarifying the other issues; very useful for myself
and for others coming across this bug report.

If your opinionn should, for example, Roughtime try and rewrite the build
system in the meantime/long-term?


Regards,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-

Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Kyle Moffett]

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Chris Lamb  wrote:
> > Also, I would be pretty keen on seeing roughtime packaged
> > in Debian, so don't hesitate to ping me in you need a
> > co-maintainer.
>
> Well, if you could package Bazel… :)

Unfortunately, there's more work than just "packaging" Bazel.  Just to
package Bazel, the open issues are:
  (1) Getting Bazel's dependencies packaged in Debian, with acceptable versions.
  (2) Fixing the Bazel build process to use Debian JAR files, rather
than pre-built versions shipped with Bazel.
  (3) Fixing the Bazel build process to comply with Debian policy
around static linking and self-extracting binaries.

But... even with that, Bazel cannot be used to _build_ a Debian
package, because it does not create Debian-policy-compliant binaries,
and it does not support all the Debian cross-compiler flags.  In order
to fix that, a bunch more integration work is needed, including
rewriting the Bazel "architecture specs" to use Debian architecture
names or tuples instead, and to fix the built-in rules to properly
support fully-dynamic linking and library installation paths.

So, yeah, it's a lot of work, and I haven't really had time to make
much progress.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

Bug#782654: Bug#838416: ITP: bazel -- Fast and correct automated build system by Google

[Chris Lamb]

Nicoo,

> I think you swapped the blocker and blockee there.

I think you forgot to cc or bcc cont...@bugs.debian.org … but I fixed
it in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=838416;msg=21
so no worries.

> Also, I would be pretty keen on seeing roughtime packaged
> in Debian, so don't hesitate to ping me in you need a
> co-maintainer.

Well, if you could package Bazel… :)


Regards,

-- 
  ,''`.
 : :'  : Chris Lamb
 `. `'`  la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
   `-