Hi,
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:48:57AM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> Thanks for confirming! Once a new git-buildpackage is uploaded,
> consider blogging about it to let people know about the new
> integration :)
Yeah, for the moment I at least added a hunk to the docs:
https://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.special.pk4.html
If at one point we would be able to able to support incremental imports
by recycling an older version in .cache/pk4/ that would be great (and
make it simple for people to patch software among several releases).
Cheers,
-- Guido
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:42 AM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:00:03PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 10:00:49PM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> >> > control: tags -1 + pending
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org> wrote:
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:42:29PM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> >> > >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > Hi,
> >> > >> > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 11:15:20AM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> >> > >> >> Thanks for filing this.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Guido Günther <a...@sigxcpu.org>
> >> > >> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >> > Package: pk4
> >> > >> >> > Version: 2
> >> > >> >> > Severity: wishlist
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >> > Hi,
> >> > >> >> > it would be nice if pk4 would allow to use "gbp import-dsc" to
> >> > >> >> > unpack
> >> > >> >> > the donwloaded sources in downloadDSCAndUnpack so users:
> >> > >> >> >
> >> > >> >> > - get a git archive right away
> >> > >> >> > - can reuise their gbp configuration such as the configured
> >> > >> >> > builder,
> >> > >> >> > - pristine-tar, ... right away
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> I think we could introduce a hook which would replace the default
> >> > >> >> behavior of dpkg-source -x, taking as arguments the path to the DSC
> >> > >> >> and the destination directory.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Sounds good.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> I wonder whether the gbp hook should live in the git-buildpackage
> >> > >> >> Debian package, though? That way, you could maintain it directly.
> >> > >> >> If
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Sure. It would be nice if setup for users would the be as simple as
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > ln -s /usr/share/doc/git-buildpackage/examples/pk4
> >> > >> > ~/pk4/pk4.deb822.d/gbp
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Almost:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> mkdir -p ~/.config/pk4/hooks-enabled/unpack/
> >> > >> ln -s /usr/share/pk4/hooks-available/unpack/gbp \
> >> > >> ~/.config/pk4/hooks-enabled/unpack/
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Regarding the symlink target, could we ship
> >> > >> /usr/share/pk4/hooks-available/unpack/gbp in git-buildpackage? That
> >> > >> way, all hooks would be in the same directory. This is similar to how
> >> > >> shell tab completion files are shipped.
> >> > >
> >> > > Shipped now with the next gbp version:
> >> > >
> >> > > https://github.com/agx/git-buildpackage/blob/master/debian/pk4
> >> >
> >> > Neat!
> >> >
> >> > I just committed
> >> > https://github.com/Debian/pk4/commit/797dc0b887abbc482a7a095d687b710509a80816,
> >> > upload to Debian follows in a second.
> >
> > Just tried it and works like a charm. Thanks a lot!
> > -- Guido
> >
> >> >
> >> > One thing I noticed: the resulting branches are master, pk4 and
> >> > upstream, which the currently checked out branch being master.
> >> > Shouldn’t the only two branches be pk4 and upstream?
> >>
> >> Yes, that's:
> >>
> >>
> >> https://github.com/agx/git-buildpackage/commit/01da1e61b003aa7cb576fbe5755a665a12c3f2ba
> >>
> >> which I should have fixed long ago.
> >> Cheers,
> >> -- Guido
> >>
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >> >> you think that’s not a good idea, could you suggest how the hook
> >> > >> >> should be implemented? I’m envisioning something like this
> >> > >> >> (untested):
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> #!/bin/sh
> >> > >> >> set -e
> >> > >> >> mkdir -p "$2"
> >> > >> >> cd "$2"
> >> > >> >> git init
> >> > >> >> gbp import-dsc "$1"
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > #!/bin/sh
> >> > >> > set -e
> >> > >> > gbp import-dsc "$1" "$2"
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > is enough (gbp will do the rest). That way we could also support
> >> > >> > incremental imports (that is if the directory is already there we
> >> > >> > simply
> >> > >> > import the new version on top of it so the use can diff between the
> >> > >> > old
> >> > >> > an new version.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Note that the pk4 output directories contain the version number, so I
> >> > >> think incremental imports wouldn’t work well.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> Side note: I think we should be fairly clear about the difference
> >> > >> >> between a gbp-from-dsc repo and a gbp-from-gbp-clone repo, to not
> >> > >> >> confuse our users.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Yeah. I was thinking of putting a .git/gbp.conf into the repo that
> >> > >> > sets
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > [DEFAULT]
> >> > >> > upstream-branch = upstream
> >> > >> > debian-branch = pk4
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > This would
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > - make sure we override settings any branch settings in
> >> > >> > debian/gbp.conf
> >> > >> > which we don't care about (since we're not cloning from Vcs-Git:
> >> > >> > - Having the default branch named pk4 would make it obvious that
> >> > >> > this
> >> > >> > is s.th. special.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > What do you think? In this case it would rather be more like your
> >> > >> > script
> >> > >> > above:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Sounds good to me.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > #!/bin/sh
> >> > >> > set -e
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > if [ ! -d $2 ]; then
> >> > >>
> >> > >> nit: use "$2" here as well
> >> > >>
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > git init "$2"
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > cat <<EOF > "$2"/.git/gbp.conf
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I suggest to add as a comment what you wrote above for the benefit of
> >> > >> readers of the hook :).
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > [DEFAULT]
> >> > >> > upstream-branch = upstream
> >> > >> > debian-branch = pk4
> >> > >> > EOF
> >> > >> > fi
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > cd "$2"
> >> > >> > gbp import-dsc "$1"
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Does this sound reasonable? I would then also provide a script that
> >> > >> > can
> >> > >> > be used with pk4-replace.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I don’t quite follow. What sort of script is required for that?
> >> > >
> >> > > Probably not even a script but a post-build hook that cats the name of
> >> > > the generated changes file to /proc/self/fd/3.
> >> >
> >> > Ah, I see.
> >> >
> >> > > Cheers,
> >> > > -- Guido
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Michael
> >> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Michael
>
