On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:10:55 +0300 Daniil wrote: > I suppose that I can try to build a package in a clean chroot and it should > help with at least some errors. But I don't think that having a package which > is so reliant on correct environment for proper build is a nice idea. I'm > going > to put that to AUR, and people rarely build AUR packages in a clean chroot
you really can not do much about that - there is no general way to guarantee that the same PKGBUILD will build in every possible environment - that is the very reason why to prefer building in a clean chroot - that eliminates the variables which are out of the control of the maintainer and guarantees that everyone is building it in a suitable environment, without resorting to heavy foreign approaches like docker On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:10:55 +0300 Daniil wrote: > 1. Does everyone face the same issues with python packages when building > iceweasel without using clean chroot? i doubt if anyone does that; and no one would recommend doing so - compiling in a clean or custom build environment is always the preferred way for any program - that is why most python programs for example, build and often expect to run in a "virtual-env", which is effectively a python chroot - that is because it is not possible to trust that every environment is sufficient and configured sanely parabola users can avoid many such headaches by building with libremakepkg - it is a very simple way to setup a clean and reproducible build environment if people have incompatibilities with their python environment, is is most likely that they have python packages installed from a third-party (such as pip), rather than using distro packages exclusively - if third-party software is in the environment, especially if it is installed at the system level with sudo etc, the system is tainted and is not supportable by anyone other than oneself - AUR users should understand that - the wise option is to keep an entire OS, chroot, or VM dedicated only for development and compiling, or even to spin up a fresh one for every program and delete it afterward On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:10:55 +0300 Daniil wrote: > 2. How is iceweasel binary package shipped in libre repository compiled? Is it > done in a clean chroot? as a matter of policy, all packages published by parabola are built in a clean chroot with libremakepkg, with networking disabled - that is another good reason to prefer an isolated build environment - to have an active internet connection during the build is another potential source of conflicts, and the possibility for sources and binaries, which would not be accounted for or audited, to influence the build, all out of the control of the PKGBUILD maintainer - mozilla and anything else which uses the rust compiler will do exactly that - anyone who would prefer to use iceweasel or icecat instead of firefox or chromium, should also not want it compiled with networking enabled, for all of the same reasons On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:10:55 +0300 Daniil wrote: > 3. Are there any plans to make build possible without chroot to empty > environment? no - as i explained, it is not possible for any upstream or distro or package maintainer to support that use-case generally, without expecting everyone to use the same environment, such as a custom docker container - parabola supports that use-case generally with libremakepkg On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:10:55 +0300 Daniil wrote: > 4. If I do this part of work, could it be merged to Parabola's iceweasel > pkgbuild or is that a non-feature/out-of-scope/etc? sure, if parabola users want that - i do not understand the motivation though - what is the value of moving the user config directory? - why would anyone care which directory is used? - that directory is extremely brittle, and should never be touched by the user On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 15:10:55 +0300 Daniil wrote: > 5. As far as I understood, Parabola's build of iceweasel tries to use system > libraries instead of bundled ones as much as possible. Do the errors I get > indicate that this work is not finished yet? that work is ever finished - mozilla is the most difficult software to maintain of any parabola package, and has the most complicated PKGBUILD of any parabola package - it is perhaps the most complicated PKGBUILD of any PKGBUILD anywhere every major release requires dependency tweaks - that is why upstreams such as mozilla tend to vendor everything but the kitchen sink; but even that is not sufficient for most releases; because the mozilla devs target LTS distros such as ubuntu and fedora - maintaining mozilla software on a rolling distro is a never-ending challenge _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@lists.parabola.nu https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev
