Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[David Spencer]

Erik:
> Remember, I had mentioned build options as well.

The build options don't tell the whole story -- lots of builds pick up
optional deps automatically. For autotools builds this could be
recorded by gzipping the config.log into /usr/doc. cmake? scons? waf,
god help us? If anyone is thinking "queue file", @'s would need to be
eliminated.

King Ed:
> Including the tar ball in /usr/doc is just
> redundant: this is easily available on SBo, SBo git and any number of
> mirrors

Exactly, the only thing that needs to be recorded is the git revision,
anything more (e.g. the tarball) would be for user convenience, but
not every user is the same.

-D.
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[King Beowulf]

On 08/10/2015 08:13 PM, Thomas Szteliga wrote:
> SlackBuild templates (and scripts) contain this line:
> 
> 
> 
> cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild
> 
> 
> 
> but what if a SlackBuild script requires patches applied
> during its execution. Shouldn't they be copied to
> 
> 
>   $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/
> 
> as well?
> 
> 
> For example, `arj` 
> requires a lot of patches
>  but the
> SlackBuild script
> 
> still contains only:
> 
> 
> cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild
> 
> 
> 
> leaving the patches out.
> 
> 

my 2 cents:  The patches, and the slackbuild script itself, is only
useful if you want to build the package. Neither has any compelling need
to be in /usr/doc, and are perfectly useless by themselves.  Any patches
needed to compile the source should, nay must, be included in the
$PRGNAM.tar.gz tar ball.  Including the tar ball in /usr/doc is just
redundant: this is easily available on SBo, SBo git and any number of
mirrors.  Besides, any user will ALREADY have these files downloaded.

For those who say "hard drive space is cheap:"  Do no assume others'
financial condition or hardware availability.  Also, wasting space is
just inefficient and lazy.

-Ed




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Erik Hanson]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 18:09:00 +0200
Matteo Bernardini  wrote:

> well, one of the reason why I won't support dependency resolution at
> al is that I make large use of optional ones: in the example I might
> have built webkitgtk against geoclue, and that information wouldn't
> have gone in the info file (not to mention the case of ffmpeg).

This isn't dependency resolution though, I see it more as package
description. I hadn't considered optional deps, but then I don't really
consider the option of dumping the .info file in a complete solution. It's
more a starting point, something for people to consider, discuss, expand
upon. Remember, I had mentioned build options as well. 

> P.S. to clarify a little my previous statement regarding debian
> tarballs that include the patches and that they store in their /pool/
> directories I really had to fix their download links many times in the
> past.
> taking as an example netcat-openbsd, its debian tarball now links to
> http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/netcat-openbsd/netcat-openbsd_1.105-7.debian.tar.gz:
> if we link that and they increment their version for whatever reason
> (from 7 to 8) the download is broken.

I wasn't aware debian did this. Seems it would be smarter to include all
patches with the SlackBuild then.


-- 
Erik Hanson


pgpxvt45qShfL.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Matteo Bernardini]

2015-08-11 17:48 GMT+02:00 Erik Hanson :
> Not sure if I could have been clearer, it wasn't an attack on you, or a
> call-out, or an invitation to discuss how Google returns Slackware package

but I hadn't took it that way :D
I just thought it would be another nice occasion to say that my
personal repository is completely unsupported (it's never enough).

> search results. Hint: it doesn't include or link to your disclaimers,
> README.txt files, emails, IRC logs, or any other places you've discussed how
> your repo works. In fact, it's really not about you or your repo at all:
>
>> > since it was built with my script! :)
>> > since it was built with my script! :)
>> > since it was built with my script! :)
>> > since it was built with my script! :)
>> > since it was built with my script! :)
>
> It's an example of a problem *I HAD* and is easily solvable. It happens
> with other well known repos. I suppose my mistake here was deciding to
> mention yours. Quickly needing a trustable webkitgtk package happened to
> me recently, was fresh on my mind, and works as an example for the
> discussion at hand.

well, np at all, it's ok! really! :-)

> It applies to any other publicly/privately made repos using SBo scripts. If
> my script, or all SBo scripts, copied the .info file into the package, this
> wouldn't be an issue. The dep info would be there, in the package,
> irrespective of whether anyone chooses to include dep info in their repo or
> not.

well, one of the reason why I won't support dependency resolution at
al is that I make large use of optional ones: in the example I might
have built webkitgtk against geoclue, and that information wouldn't
have gone in the info file (not to mention the case of ffmpeg).

Matteo

P.S. to clarify a little my previous statement regarding debian
tarballs that include the patches and that they store in their /pool/
directories I really had to fix their download links many times in the
past.
taking as an example netcat-openbsd, its debian tarball now links to
http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/netcat-openbsd/netcat-openbsd_1.105-7.debian.tar.gz:
if we link that and they increment their version for whatever reason
(from 7 to 8) the download is broken.
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Erik Hanson]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:58:40 +0200
Matteo Bernardini  wrote:

> 2015-08-11 16:46 GMT+02:00 Erik Hanson :
> > Thinking to a recent example that affected me, webkitgtk from ponce's repo
> > is broken on it's own. The required libwebp package is not documented
> > anywhere in/near the package. 
, since it
> > was built with my script! :) I imagine this is difficult to solve for less
> > experienced users, who may not know where the original script came from, or
> > know/care to use ldd or other tools to find out what's missing.
> 
> you mean my packages repository? but that is for my personal use only. :-)
> maybe you missed when it happened but I stated many times that if
> anybody would like to use it either they solve dependencies with the
> ones listed on SBo or use the repository as a whole: I don't provide
> dependency resolution for it. ;-)
> if instead you mean the script on git the webkitgtk.info file is the
> same as on SBo.


*sigh*

> > This is not ponce's fault, of course
> > This is not ponce's fault, of course
> > This is not ponce's fault, of course
> > This is not ponce's fault, of course
> > This is not ponce's fault, of course

Not sure if I could have been clearer, it wasn't an attack on you, or a
call-out, or an invitation to discuss how Google returns Slackware package
search results. Hint: it doesn't include or link to your disclaimers,
README.txt files, emails, IRC logs, or any other places you've discussed how
your repo works. In fact, it's really not about you or your repo at all:

> > since it was built with my script! :)
> > since it was built with my script! :)
> > since it was built with my script! :)
> > since it was built with my script! :)
> > since it was built with my script! :)

It's an example of a problem *I HAD* and is easily solvable. It happens
with other well known repos. I suppose my mistake here was deciding to
mention yours. Quickly needing a trustable webkitgtk package happened to
me recently, was fresh on my mind, and works as an example for the
discussion at hand.

It applies to any other publicly/privately made repos using SBo scripts. If
my script, or all SBo scripts, copied the .info file into the package, this
wouldn't be an issue. The dep info would be there, in the package,
irrespective of whether anyone chooses to include dep info in their repo or
not.

> regarding linking the tarball patches from debian it happened many
> times in the past that the versioned tarball linked had been removed
> fom their repository, breaking the download: that's the main reason
> why I would prefer them to be included with the script.

Nevermind, I guess.


-- 
Erik Hanson


pgpzDWF9sPx6b.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Matteo Bernardini]

2015-08-11 16:46 GMT+02:00 Erik Hanson :
> Thinking to a recent example that affected me, webkitgtk from ponce's repo
> is broken on it's own. The required libwebp package is not documented
> anywhere in/near the package. This is not ponce's fault, of course, since it
> was built with my script! :) I imagine this is difficult to solve for less
> experienced users, who may not know where the original script came from, or
> know/care to use ldd or other tools to find out what's missing.

you mean my packages repository? but that is for my personal use only. :-)
maybe you missed when it happened but I stated many times that if
anybody would like to use it either they solve dependencies with the
ones listed on SBo or use the repository as a whole: I don't provide
dependency resolution for it. ;-)
if instead you mean the script on git the webkitgtk.info file is the
same as on SBo.

regarding linking the tarball patches from debian it happened many
times in the past that the versioned tarball linked had been removed
fom their repository, breaking the download: that's the main reason
why I would prefer them to be included with the script.

Matteo
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Erik Hanson]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 02:02:53 -0400
B Watson  wrote:

> On 8/11/15, Didier Spaier  wrote:
> > In this case the Debian packaging tarball that
> > includes the patches is:
> > http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arj/arj_3.10.22-14.debian.tar.xz
> > IMHO including the patches in the SBo tarball,
> > as done for arj, has the inconvennience that
> > we don't know from which Debian packaging tarball
> > (for sid, sqeeze, wheezy,stretch...  ?) they come
> > from. I didn't check but maybe the patches differ.
> 
> They don't. If they did, they'd have a different patchlevel (the -14).
> 
> I included the patches in the slackbuild tarball in the possible but
> unlikely event that debian.org disappears someday.

I'm a bit divided on this, though I really do feel patches used (unaltered)
from someplace like debian or fedora should just be linked in the .info
file as a standard download. There's no real chance of them going away, but
in that event the filename/md5sum from the .info file can be used to search
for a mirror. There's no shortage of mirrors.


-- 
Erik Hanson


pgpuVNmc5KTI1.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Erik Hanson]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 05:13:12 +0200
Thomas Szteliga  wrote:

> but what if a SlackBuild script requires patches applied
> during its execution. Shouldn't they be copied to
>   $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/

This is currently up to the maintainer and some scripts in the repo do copy
the patches into the docs dir with the SlackBuild. So, there's nothing
preventing it. I am all for making it mandatory, since a script can be
completely useless without the patches. 

I also wouldn't mind the .info and build options (somehow) being documented
in the final package. I've long held the opinion that all information
required to rebuild the exact package should be included in the package
itself.

Thinking to a recent example that affected me, webkitgtk from ponce's repo
is broken on it's own. The required libwebp package is not documented
anywhere in/near the package. This is not ponce's fault, of course, since it
was built with my script! :) I imagine this is difficult to solve for less
experienced users, who may not know where the original script came from, or
know/care to use ldd or other tools to find out what's missing.

At the very least, I don't think there are any negatives to including
patches and the .info file.


-- 
Erik Hanson


pgpUQ4W6bY6PG.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[B Watson]

On 8/11/15, Didier Spaier  wrote:
> In this case the Debian packaging tarball that
> includes the patches is:
> http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arj/arj_3.10.22-14.debian.tar.xz
> IMHO including the patches in the SBo tarball,
> as done for arj, has the inconvennience that
> we don't know from which Debian packaging tarball
> (for sid, sqeeze, wheezy,stretch...  ?) they come
> from. I didn't check but maybe the patches differ.

They don't. If they did, they'd have a different patchlevel (the -14).

I included the patches in the slackbuild tarball in the possible but
unlikely event that debian.org disappears someday.

As far as including patches in /usr/doc... if we're going to do that,
we should be including everything from the slackbuild tarball. README,
extra docs, .info file, etc.
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Didier Spaier]

Hi,

On 11/08/2015 05:13, Thomas Szteliga wrote:

SlackBuild templates (and scripts) contain this line:



cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
 > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild



but what if a SlackBuild script requires patches applied
during its execution. Shouldn't they be copied to


$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/

as well?


For example, `arj` 
requires a lot of patches
 but the
SlackBuild script

still contains only:


cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
 > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild



leaving the patches out.


Well, it depends.

In the aforementioned case, the patches comes for Debian that
distributes them in a tarball found e.g. here for sid
https://packages.debian.org/sid/arj
In this case the Debian packaging tarball that
includes the patches is:
http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arj/arj_3.10.22-14.debian.tar.xz
IMHO including the patches in the SBo tarball,
as done for arj, has the inconvennience that
we don't know from which Debian packaging tarball
(for sid, sqeeze, wheezy,stretch...  ?) they come
from. I didn't check but maybe the patches differ.

For that reason in such a case tend to provide
the link to the Debian packaging tarball as a
source file unpacked by the SlackBuild, instead
of including the patches in the SBo tarball.

That's what I have for 'bogl', 'bidiv' or 'newt",
not (yet) submitted but available here:
http://slint.fr/packages/extra/bogl/build/
http://slint.fr/packages/extra/bidiv/build/
http://slint.fr/packages/extra/newt/build/

For instance:

for i in `cat ../debian/patches/series`; do
  cat ../debian/patches/$i | patch -p1 --verbose
done

I think that makes the maintenance easier:
_ We know from which Debian packaging tarball
  come the patches
_ possibly some of them only are applied, but
  then we know which are left over.

But there are other cases.

For Bicon:
http://slackbuilds.org/repository/14.1/system/bicon/
the source are on git and I cherry picked a patch
from its commit and included it in the SBo tarball.
In this case I agree that I could (should?) have
provided it in
$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/
possibly in a subdirectory
$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/patches

Cheers,
Didier

PS an attentive reader could notice that newt is
already available @http://slackbuids.org.

But it is built from the sources hosted @Fedora,
that left over a patch allowing 'whiptail" to
properly display bi-directional text.
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[John Vogel]

On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 23:44:50 -0500
Kyle Guinn  wrote:

> On 8/10/15, Thomas Szteliga  wrote:
> > SlackBuild templates (and scripts) contain this line:
> >
> >
> > 
> > cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> > > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild
> > 
> >
> >
> > but what if a SlackBuild script requires patches applied
> > during its execution. Shouldn't they be copied to
> >
> >
> > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/
> >
> > as well?
> >
> >
> > For example, `arj` 
> > requires a lot of patches
> >  but the
> > SlackBuild script
> > 
> > still contains only:
> >
> > 
> > cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> > > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild
> > 
> >
> >
> > leaving the patches out.
> 
> I've noticed this as well.  Does anyone find it helpful that the
> script is installed in /usr/doc?  Maybe we can omit it instead?
> 
> -Kyle
>

I like having the script installed to docdir. It's a quick
reference to how the current package was built. I've utilized
it's presence more than a few times. I'm not against having
the patches there also. Seems innocuous and makes changes
made to the source transparent. I don't feel it's actually
necessary. I could see arguments against, such as unnecessary
space being taken up, I guess.

John
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Ryan P.C. McQuen]

> I've noticed this as well.  Does anyone find it helpful that the
> script is installed in /usr/doc?  Maybe we can omit it instead?
>
> -Kyle

Is anyone really that strapped for disk space that we need to be concerned?

If the rare user is that concerned, surely they can write a script to clean
out things like this. I like having the build script there, and wouldn't
mind the patches being included also.
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

Re: [Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Kyle Guinn]

On 8/10/15, Thomas Szteliga  wrote:
> SlackBuild templates (and scripts) contain this line:
>
>
> 
> cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild
> 
>
>
> but what if a SlackBuild script requires patches applied
> during its execution. Shouldn't they be copied to
>
>
>   $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/
>
> as well?
>
>
> For example, `arj` 
> requires a lot of patches
>  but the
> SlackBuild script
> 
> still contains only:
>
> 
> cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> > $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild
> 
>
>
> leaving the patches out.

I've noticed this as well.  Does anyone find it helpful that the
script is installed in /usr/doc?  Maybe we can omit it instead?

-Kyle
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/

[Slackbuilds-users] Patches in `$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/`?

[Thomas Szteliga]

SlackBuild templates (and scripts) contain this line:



cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild



but what if a SlackBuild script requires patches applied
during its execution. Shouldn't they be copied to


$PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/

as well?


For example, `arj` 
requires a lot of patches
 but the
SlackBuild script

still contains only:


cat $CWD/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild \
> $PKG/usr/doc/$PRGNAM-$VERSION/$PRGNAM.SlackBuild



leaving the patches out.



-- 
Best regards,

Thomas Szteliga
https://github.com/websafe/



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
SlackBuilds-users mailing list
SlackBuilds-users@slackbuilds.org
http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/