Bug#870786: texlive-bin: Make source package bootstrappable

[Norbert Preining]

Hi Daniel,

as I said, I moved the jar building to src:texlive-extra, and removed the
jdk deps and all the building stuff from texlive-bin.

Both packages are uploaded now. Could you please check that this did
really fix it for you?

Thanks

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert   http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. +JAIST +TeX Live +Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

Bug#870786: texlive-bin: Make source package bootstrappable

[Norbert Preining]

Hi Daniel,

> ifeq (,$(filter stage1,$(DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
> javac ... -o tex4ht.jar
> endif

In fact I will go different direction:
* move all the necessary java files to src:texlive-extra
* build the jar there (arch=all)
So nothing should be needed with respect to special profiles
etc etc, just that java dependency will be dropped.

All the best

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert   http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. +JAIST +TeX Live +Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

Bug#870786: texlive-bin: Make source package bootstrappable

[Daniel Schepler]

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Norbert Preining  wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
>> speaking, I've found there are enough of these cycles that it's easier
>> for now just to build without tex4ht.jar.  It would be nice if there
>> were a stage1 or nojava build profile in the texlive-bin source
>> package that would do the same thing.
>
> Do you need a different package or a target in debian/rules?
> From the above paragraph I could read that a target in debian/rules
> suffice, but that sounds unrealistic.
>
> Are there any other problems than the tex4ht.jar? I would actually
> prefer to ship texlive-binaries without the need to rebuild the
> jar, but that is a requirement.
>
> If a debian/rules target is not enough, I only see the way to
> create an additional packages
> texlive-binaries-java
> that only contains the .jar file (and maybe others in future).
>
> Another idea - but I am not sure whether this is possible - would be
> to move the jar file into texlive-plain-generic where all the other
> tex4ht files are. But that would interfere with the arch=all status
> of texlive-plain-generic I guess.
>
> Grateful for any ideas, proposals, advice!

It would be best to have a full build profile rather than a custom
target in debian/rules, e.g. key the Java stuff from

ifeq (,$(filter stage1,$(DEB_BUILD_PROFILES)))
javac ... -o tex4ht.jar
endif

; and update debian/control with:

Build-Depends: ..., default-jdk , ...

...

Package: texlive-binaries-java
Architecture: any
Build-Profiles: 
...

Or, if it makes more sense for texlive-binaries-java to be
Architecture: all, in that case just moving default-jdk to
Build-Depends-Indep would be sufficient.

And yes, it would probably be best to split the conditional parts out
into a separate package, so that the profile build just drops packages
instead of modifying the binary contents of existing packages.
-- 
Daniel Schepler

Bug#870786: texlive-bin: Make source package bootstrappable

[Norbert Preining]

Hi Daniel,

> speaking, I've found there are enough of these cycles that it's easier
> for now just to build without tex4ht.jar.  It would be nice if there
> were a stage1 or nojava build profile in the texlive-bin source
> package that would do the same thing.

Do you need a different package or a target in debian/rules?
>From the above paragraph I could read that a target in debian/rules
suffice, but that sounds unrealistic.

Are there any other problems than the tex4ht.jar? I would actually
prefer to ship texlive-binaries without the need to rebuild the
jar, but that is a requirement.

If a debian/rules target is not enough, I only see the way to
create an additional packages
texlive-binaries-java
that only contains the .jar file (and maybe others in future).

Another idea - but I am not sure whether this is possible - would be
to move the jar file into texlive-plain-generic where all the other
tex4ht files are. But that would interfere with the arch=all status
of texlive-plain-generic I guess.

Grateful for any ideas, proposals, advice!

Thanks

Norbert

--
PREINING Norbert   http://www.preining.info
Accelia Inc. +JAIST +TeX Live +Debian Developer
GPG: 0x860CDC13   fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13

Bug#870786: texlive-bin: Make source package bootstrappable

[Daniel Schepler]

Source: texlive-bin
Version: 2017.20170613.44572-3
Severity: wishlist

The relatively recently added build dependency of texlive-bin on
default-jdk introduced several build dependency cycles, such as:

default-jdk Depends on openjdk-8-jdk
openjdk-8 Build-Depends on libgtk2.0-dev
gtk+2.0 Build-Depends on shared-mime-info
shared-mime-info Build-Depends on docbook-utils
docbook-utils Depends on jadetex
jadetex (indirectly) Depends on texlive-binaries

Ideally, almost every package using texlive-binaries would put the
dependency in Build-Depends-Indep (splitting docs into an
Architecture: all package if necessary).  However, practically
speaking, I've found there are enough of these cycles that it's easier
for now just to build without tex4ht.jar.  It would be nice if there
were a stage1 or nojava build profile in the texlive-bin source
package that would do the same thing.

Of course, that would require either splitting out tex4ht.jar and
associated files into a separate package, or else the resulting
package would have to be renamed to something like
texlive-binaries-stage1 to reflect the changed package contents.
-- 
Daniel Schepler