Comments on: I’m not afraid of people using JHBuild http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/ Making your brain invert and fall out of your ear since 2007 Wed, 31 Mar 2010 07:45:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Loïc Minier http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/comment-page-1/#comment-243 Loïc Minier Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:02:29 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/?p=131#comment-243 I think this is a great idea! Concerning mapping of versions, you should pay attention to "epochs" in Debian/Ubuntu packages. To map GNOME packages to Debian/Ubuntu packages or vice-versa, I think we could add meta-information to the packages themselves, in the source package which would be copied in the binary packages (e.g. you would have the GNOME module information just next to the package name and version). This does call for clearly defining what we put in there: mixed case upstream name? Do we limit to modules which have a repo at svn.gnome.org or git.gnome.org? Or those that install tarballs on the GNOME FTP? etc. We do such mappings in the source packages already to allow retrieval of the .tar.gz from upstream when calling get-orig-source. There's also the problem of splitting: gnome-python might be split into python-gconf and python-gnomecanvas, evolution-data-server libs are split in a gazillion of lib-dev packages etc. I think this is a harder problem which calls to express finer grained dependencies in jhbuild modulesets (e.g. I need this .pc or this .so to build), perhaps making the current names aliases to standard definitions (if you say you dep on gnome-python that expands to a dependency on all python modules shipped in this module). I'm happy to help you on the Debian/Ubuntu packages front. :-) I think this is a great idea!

Concerning mapping of versions, you should pay attention to “epochs” in Debian/Ubuntu packages.

To map GNOME packages to Debian/Ubuntu packages or vice-versa, I think we could add meta-information to the packages themselves, in the source package which would be copied in the binary packages (e.g. you would have the GNOME module information just next to the package name and version). This does call for clearly defining what we put in there: mixed case upstream name? Do we limit to modules which have a repo at svn.gnome.org or git.gnome.org? Or those that install tarballs on the GNOME FTP? etc. We do such mappings in the source packages already to allow retrieval of the .tar.gz from upstream when calling get-orig-source.

There’s also the problem of splitting: gnome-python might be split into python-gconf and python-gnomecanvas, evolution-data-server libs are split in a gazillion of lib-dev packages etc. I think this is a harder problem which calls to express finer grained dependencies in jhbuild modulesets (e.g. I need this .pc or this .so to build), perhaps making the current names aliases to standard definitions (if you say you dep on gnome-python that expands to a dependency on all python modules shipped in this module).

I’m happy to help you on the Debian/Ubuntu packages front. :-)

]]> By: antimonio http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/comment-page-1/#comment-242 antimonio Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:03:53 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/?p=131#comment-242 Nice work, thanks. I cannot help you for now, still need to learn a lot about this. Nice work, thanks. I cannot help you for now, still need to learn a lot about this.

]]> By: Abderrahim http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/comment-page-1/#comment-241 Abderrahim Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:53:56 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/?p=131#comment-241 Yay ! This is the only thing preventing me from using JHbuild (I don't have enough bandwith and patience to download all gnome libraries from git). I wanted to do this but couldn't find the time. I'll be happy to help. (btw, the link has an extra http://) For package names, I think the best idea is to try to do a contents search (searching for the pkg-config file for a library). this has been discussed on Anjuta mailing list (there is also bug #558856 on gnome bugzilla) Yay !
This is the only thing preventing me from using JHbuild (I don’t have enough bandwith and patience to download all gnome libraries from git). I wanted to do this but couldn’t find the time. I’ll be happy to help. (btw, the link has an extra http://)
For package names, I think the best idea is to try to do a contents search (searching for the pkg-config file for a library). this has been discussed on Anjuta mailing list (there is also bug #558856 on gnome bugzilla)

]]> By: Murray Cumming http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/comment-page-1/#comment-240 Murray Cumming Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:37:16 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/?p=131#comment-240 We've had big problems with jhbuild-built python modules when not building python in jhbuild. Is there any plan to deal with them? We’ve had big problems with jhbuild-built python modules when not building python in jhbuild. Is there any plan to deal with them?

]]> By: colin walters http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/comment-page-1/#comment-239 colin walters Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:22:16 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/?p=131#comment-239 You sir, rock! You sir, rock!

]]> By: Alberto Ruiz http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/2009/07/15/im-not-afraid-of-people-using-jhbuild/comment-page-1/#comment-238 Alberto Ruiz Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:09:04 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/johncarr/?p=131#comment-238 Chocolate train! Chocolate train!

]]>