On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 01:46:23PM -0500, geoffroy vallee wrote: > Hi all, > > I started to port systemimager 3.7.5 on Debian sarge based on the > systemimager-debian repository. Please, find in attachment my first > patches/files. > The modifications allow one to create all standard packages modulo the > following limitations: > - the systemimager-bittorrent package is not complete, few files are still > missing, e.g., /etc/init.d/systemimager-server-bittorrent and > /usr/bin/si_installbtimage, > - the systemimager-i386initrd-template.package is still missing. > > Any idea how to fix these two issues? I did not have the time to big it up > because of a lack of time, the solution may be simple. I just wanted to send > out these modifications before to continue, just in case someone else is > working on that. :-) > I am not sure the patch 03 is the good way to patch the linux config file. > Let me know if you prefer to use another way.
Thanks a lot Geoffroy! I apologize for not responding sooner, I had been filtering sisuite-devel to another folder and ignoring it as it filled with mailman-admin stuff. I've updated my procmailrc so that I should see messages to sisuite-devel in a timely fashion. (Thanks to Joshua Cope for poking me about this thread). Anyway, on with the comments. The Bittorrent stuff looks good. Can you send me a single patch that adds only the systemimager-bittorrent stuff in control.in and the bittorrent part of the rules patch, as well as an entry in debian/changelog that says something like "add systemimager-bittorrent package"? dch -a and svn diff are your friends here. The other changes to control.in and rules look good too, and all seem to be of the category of "updating version strings for 3.7.5". So, similar to the above, can you send me a diff with just those other changes (dependency changes, version string)? I don't think we need an explicit changelog entry for this one, since it falls under updating to the new upstream. As for the kernel updates, 2.6.18 is now in sid, so please use that version. And, can you combine the config changes and the kernel.rul changes in a single patch (w/ a debian/changelog entry). Some meta comments... I'd prefer it if you sent each patch in a separate e-mail, and include the patch inline (as opposed to an attachment). Essentially, same rules as lkml. The reason is that it makes it easier for me to reply to specific code changes inline (you'll see a cut & pasted the ones above), and that it makes it easier to discuss patches because a mail-per-patch means that discussions of those patches are in separate, easier-to-follow threads. Also, as I've implied above, patches that do one logical thing and touch multiple files are preferred over patches that do multiple things to a single file. That way if we decide to, say drop bittorrent support, we can easily just revert that changeset w/o affecting other functionality. Thanks a lot Geoffroy, this work is very appreciated. Let me know if you have any questions about the above. -- dann frazier ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ sisuite-devel mailing list sisuite-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-devel
