Am 04.01.22 um 07:39 schrieb Tim Mooney via oi-dev:
In regard to: Re: [oi-dev] manually specifying dependencies between...:
Am 04.01.22 um 06:10 schrieb Tim Mooney via oi-dev:
All-
My basic question is what the best practice is for how packagers
should be
specifying dependencies between language modules/libraries for
scripting
languages? Currently I'm specifically interested in perl modules, but
the same idea is relevant for python, ruby, etc.
As an example of one way to do it, there's
oi-userland/components/perl/libwww-perl/libwww-perl-PERLVER.p5m.
Alexander manually added all of the modules that are needed for
libwww-perl-###, using the most obvious, "friendly" syntax for depend:
depend fmri=library/perl-5/encode-locale-$(PLV) type=require
depend fmri=library/perl-5/file-listing-$(PLV) type=require
depend fmri=library/perl-5/html-parser-$(PLV) type=require
etc.
Doing it that way, though, those dependencies don't get added to
Makefile
when you do "gmake REQUIRED_PACKAGES", and they don't appear to be
added
to the "pkg5" metadata after a successful publish.
This is intended. The requirements modeled in the Makefile (and thus in
pkg5) are BUILD dependencies whereas depend actions in the manifest are
RUNTIME dependencies.
Thanks Andreas! That's the clearest explanation I've seen of that, and
it does help to clear up some things.
So thinking not about scripting languages but instead a traditional
ELF binary that's linked against multiple libraries, when I do a
gmake install; gmake REQUIRED_PACKAGES
pkg is adding build-time dependencies to the Makefile, but a later
gmake publish
is also adding the same dependencies to the package automatically as
runtime dependencies, correct? It must be, based on ELF linkage,
otherwise we would have a lot of packages that don't have correct runtime
dependencies because we're not (manually) specifying them in the
manifest.
I don't know. As it hasn't been a problem yet, I didn't care to look
into it.
Alas our tools are not good at detecting runtime
dependencies and sometimes fail on build dependencies (eg. for test
requirements). So we need to manually add missing dependencies. The
actual state of both, runtime and build dependencies is lacking. And
sometimes you'll be hit by this fact when you build or install packages
locally. This is also a reason why sometimes local builds are fine while
they fail on the build server (and vice versa).
The same is true if you want to make a language module depend upon the
version of the perl interpreter it was built for. I first tried using
this syntax:
depend fmri=runtime/perl-$(PLV) type=require
or variants of it as outlined in the pkg guide, like:
depend fmri=pkg:/runtime/perl-$(PLV) type=require
Dependencies specified that way aren't output by REQUIRED_PACKAGES.
However, if you change the syntax to a "less obvious" method:
depend fmri=__TBD pkg.debug.depend.file=perl \
pkg.debug.depend.path=usr/perl5/$(PERLVER)/bin type=require
then REQUIRED_PACKAGES *does* add the dependency to the Makefile and
the
pkg5 metadata. That's a trick that Aurélien has used in some places.
When IPS is working (eg. by running pkg install) it does not have access
to the information in the Makefiles or pkg5.
From what I know pkg5 files aren't yet used at all. They are artifacts
from future enhancements of the build tools Aurélien has been working
on.
Oh, interesting, I wasn't aware that pkg5 wasn't really even being used.
I assumed that was some critical metadata that pkg used.
So what's the right thing to do here? Use the simple syntax in the .p5m
file and don't care that the dependency isn't listed in the Makefile or
pkg5? Use the more complicated syntax, with "fmri=__TBD" and a file
and
path from the dependency? Don't specify anything in the .p5m file and
instead manually add the dependency in the Makefile, as you might for
a build dependency?
It depends on what you want to model: build dependency, runtime
dependency or both.
In the case that prompted my question, it would be both.
For example the perl/File-Listing module has an unrecorded build-time
and runtime dependency on library/perl-5/http-date for the same version
of perl (i.e. library/perl-5/file-listing-524 needs
library/perl-5/http-date-524).
It's needed at build time to run the test suite.
It's also needed at runtime for the correct functioning of the module.
I want to correctly record that file-listing for one version of perl
needs http-date from the same version of perl.
In this case, am I correct in thinking I should be doing both of these
things:
1) manually add REQUIRED_PACKAGES += library/perl-5/http-date-###
to the Makefile for the build-time dependency.
2) add
depend fmri=library/perl-5/http-date-$(PLV) type=require
to the manifest as a runtime dependency?
Yes, to my knowledge. I am still learning myself.
Andreas
_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
