Le 1 juin 2005 à 06:52, Dave Vasilevsky a écrit :

On May 31, 2005, at 10:55 PM, Michèle Garoche wrote:
Le 31 mai 2005 à 23:48, Matthew Sachs a écrit :
The second build will use 10.4-transitional and not try to force 4.0, and will build the packages as 'nobody' instead of 'root'.
That would be good, because I've begun on 27th May and only 1120 packages have been built at the time being mostly because I should provide my password many times. 
Even when fink builds as 'nobody', the fink program still runs as root for everything except building. I think you should run buildfink as root, so when it calls fink it never has to ask for a password.
Oh, I don't like that, running as root maybe a week or so, night and day, with the Apache server running.

It will be interesting also to have all variants of a package systematically built, if possible at all, but with a possibility to exclude some variants if they are known not to compile at a certain time (I think of ssl variants for example).
I believe buildfink already does this.
Only if you build the filter for it. The question here was is it possible to build the filter automatically.

Another one would be to get the graph of each dependency, because the graph of all dependencies is not always easily readable.
If/when we ever have an unstable bindist, 'apt-cache dotty' should do this. But most packages have so many recursive dependencies that it's still hard to visualize.
It is already possible to do it, provided that graphviz is installed (or had been installed and reinstall it). The only thing that is not obvious to me (but then it's more a question of mastering dotty is how to go from a graph with all dependencies to a number of graphs with only one dependency). I'll get an example to make it clearer: say I want to have dependencies graph for bluefish-gnome2 variant. It is unreadable as it is (too many dependencies), but then it could be possible to transform it into a graph for gnome-vfs2, a graph for libxml2, etc... till it comes with something readable.

Cheers,
Michèle


Reply via email to