On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 07:14:12PM -0700, Brad Roberts 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.
You can always have separate packages that depend on each other. > #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. [...] As Iain said, you could follow the path of flash-installer-nonfree, which just contains a script that downloads the binaries from some URL upon installation. Of course, you'd still have to make sure that the downloaded binaries are installed in the correct places[1]. [1] See: http://wiki.debian.org/FilesystemHierarchyStandard T -- INTEL = Only half of "intelligence".
