-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update debian packaging #1887
Update debian packaging #1887
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With my hat of someone who uses "run in place" I don't have any concerns about this.
I didn't look quite so carefully at e.g., the debian/rules changes but the build system should exercise that pretty well.
I'll have a look at the debian build stuff. Got a test build going as I
write this. I notice the run-in-place test on github fail. Perhaps
something to adress quickly?
…--
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsn
|
debian/extras/etc / | ||
debian/extras/lib / | ||
|
||
debian/extras/usr/share/icons usr/share |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would it be possible to specify linuxcncicon.svg
(and linux-logo.svg
, not sure if this is used anywhere). Then you could include the other icons in their respective documentation packages. That would solve #1655
MAIN_PACKAGE_NAME=linuxcnc-uspace | ||
OTHER_MAIN_PACKAGE_NAME=linuxcnc |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If your already in and removing things, MAIN_PACKAGE_NAME
, and OTHER_MAIN_PACKAGE_NAME
is duplicated.
[Håvard]
If your already in and removing things, `MAIN_PACKAGE_NAME`, and
`OTHER_MAIN_PACKAGE_NAME` is duplicated.
I would instead recommend to not include the removal of stuff in
d/configure in this pull request, and do such cleanup in a separate pull
reqeust. I already did so in <URL: #1835 >.
…--
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen
|
The build failure is
which looks like a missing build dependency? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A comment on the explicit debian/*install files: Cannot we somehow use wildcards, still? Or just specify the directory only? If we cannot make it simpler than what d/rules implemented before then we are doing something wrong somewhere.
The reason all the bin/ files are listed explicitly, if I am not mistaken, is that one of them should go in one package (halcompile), and the rest in another. Any idea how to do this with wildcards? |
If dh_install would work like the IP routing then it would notice the more detailed instruction for halcompile :) Is the order important in install file? Not aware of those semantics, I would move halcompile in d/rules as an exception, I think. |
Yeah, that's right: This is one way in which the now-deprecated |
Looks like that, but it was actually me breaking the relationship between the |
Speaking of packaging, I've reported in #1893 some lintian errors got by
@Tom_L and @jethornton building master on Bullseye which, nevertheless,
succeeded!
Community has been consuming quite some energy lately trying to build 2.9
on Stable. Is there something in our reach to help? Bullseye target on
buildbot? Proper Debian backport?
Have a nice sunday friends
J
|
I'd suggest a backport. |
Le dim. 7 août 2022 à 15:15, Steffen Möller ***@***.***> a
écrit :
I'd suggest a backport.
My preference too
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am happy with what you have done. My only request would be that you integrate the additional uploads listed in https://sources.debian.org/src/linuxcnc/2.9.0~pre0%2Bgit20220402.2500863908-4/debian/changelog/ in debian/changelog. This eliminates an older PR of mine somewhere.
@sebastian, we are just collectively agreeing while still on Jitsie that you please merge this! |
f4cbec8
to
20d714b
Compare
The tools have gotten better, we don't need this clumsy work-around any more.
This is mostly to help the debian packaging build just the architecture-dependent parts (the software, via `dpkg-buildpackage -B`) or just the architecture-independent parts (the docs, via `dpkg-buildpackage -A`).
Install docs with dh_installdocs, other files (like .desktop entries) with dh_install. Install all docs in /usr/share/doc/linuxcnc, not /usr/share/doc/linuxcnc-uspace, because that's where the .desktop files look for the docs. Handle each lang explicitly because we'll need to different special things for -en vs all the others.
The new translation infrastructure means we need to build the translated docs to generate the g-code quick refs. Since we have separate "-arch" and "-indep" targets in debian/rules now, we don't build the docs when building linuxcnc-uspace, so the g-code refs need to move to the doc debs.
We need to list everything we want in linuxcnc-uspace explicitly now, since we changed DESTDIR to install into debian/tmp.
The sample configs need to live in /usr/share/doc/linuxcnc (not /usr/share/doc/linuxcnc-uspace), because that's where the linuxcnc launcher script looks for them. Handle example nc_files/ symlink with dh_link rather than "by hand".
…d vice versa Some documentation files (gcode*.html) moved from linuxcnc-uspace to linuxcnc-doc-{en,es,fr} (but none moved to -zh-cn). Thus the new linuxcnc-doc-{en,es,fr} debs Break old linuxcnc-uspace, and Replace old linuxcnc-uspace, and the new linuxcnc-uspace Breaks old linuxcnc-doc-{en,es,fr}.
20d714b
to
5932f22
Compare
This fixes packaging on Debian Unstable:
src/Makefile
, but the common build targets used by humans (i.e.make
andmake docs
) are unchanged.debian/rules
to rely more on the debhelper tools, and do less "by hand".debian/rules
that made it accidentally rebuild stuff it had just built...debian/configure
(just because I happened to be in the neighborhood)This PR (or something like it) is needed for the next dsc upload to debian.org. I'd appreciate feedback from folks who know debian packaging (@smoe, @petterreinholdtsen, @jepler, and anyone else with input).