On 27 September 2012 03:14, Brad Roberts <bra...@puremagic.com> wrote: > On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:58:08PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote: >> [...] >> > I don't know what's involved in getting built-packages into the >> > various distributions. I suspect that a number of them prefer to be >> > built by their own automation from original (or forked) sources. I'd >> > be happy to engage with the appropriate people to explore ways to work >> > together in this space. >> [...] >> >> For Debian, the process is relatively simple: >> >> 1) Create a debian/ subdir in the source tree, with appropriate >> control files (for existing packages, this has already been done) >> a) Update debian/changelog to reflect the new version number. >> b) Adjust any necessary dependencies, etc., in debian/control. >> >> 2) Build the package by running 'dpkg-buildpackage ...' in the source >> tree. This creates a bunch of files (including the binary .deb) in >> the parent directory. >> >> 3) [Optional] Preferably, test the .deb to make sure it doesn't cause >> massive system breakage. >> >> 4) Upload the generated package files in the parent directory by the >> build process, either by sending it to a sponsor or uploading it >> directly to the upload queue if you have upload access. The dupload >> script automatically determines which file(s) should be uploaded. >> >> Once the package is uploaded successfully, the autobuilder >> infrastructure can be used to build the package for the umpteen >> architectures that Debian supports. >> >> IIRC, once the package gets into the Debian archive it will eventually >> find its way into Ubuntu (and possibly the other Debian derivatives). > > That works well for packages which are single source tree. The current > dmd, druntime, phobos, d-programming-language, tools separation makes that > a little more challenging to put together, but not a lot. It's probably > worth doing regardless. I realize that gdc and ldc are both in better > shape in this area already. > > #4 there implies it's a source package, though I could be mis-interpreting > you. Is there a path for externally built binary packages? That's fairly > counter to the general distribution philosophy for most of them, so I'm > giong to guess no. > > Thanks, > Brad
For #4, yes. Ubuntu is a better platform to approach for externally built binary-only packages. But for debian, you could possibly do something similar to how eg: the flash-plugin installer package works - downloads the tar.gz/zip from an external site, extract and install / configure in system. Regards -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';