RE: RFC: setup.ini change
> -Original Message- > From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002 1:30 AM > I don't think you read Chuck's proposal. He wants something > which would automatically track version numbers in the > referenced *package*. > Saying: I read it, but apparently didn't grok it fully. This will come with time, there's more back-end stuff to do first. The goal is to achieve what apt-get source does, in terms of source packages being different to binaries (for names) and having their own build dependencies. I realise these are separate issues though :}. Rob
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 11:51:10PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 2:43 AM > >> >Chris, can we get that "external-src: other-pkg-name" thing >> into upset? >> > (or "other-src" or whatever) Reminder: >> >> It's pretty complicated to add. If you specify external-src >> it will potentially have to add test, prev, curr entries for >> the packages. >> >> However, IMO, it makes sense for this option to actually be >> passed into setup.ini so that setup.exe can understand that >> this is basically a symbolic link rather than a "copy". > >Setup doesn't need any changes - the >source: >tag has all the functionality Chuck needs now. It'll only download the >file once (well, there are some corner cases, but relatively few and far >between). I don't think you read Chuck's proposal. He wants something which would automatically track version numbers in the referenced *package*. Saying: external-source: ../tiff-1.3.2-1-src.tar.bz2 wasn't what he was going for. He wanted to be able to say: external-source: tiff and have something (either setup or upset) figure out that the source for libtiff-1.3.2-1.tar.bz2 is tiff-1.3.2-1-src.tar.bz2. I thought that maybe the functionality for this belonged in setup.exe rather than in upset, i.e., I just pass the option through as is. cgf
RE: RFC: setup.ini change
> -Original Message- > From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 2:43 AM > >Chris, can we get that "external-src: other-pkg-name" thing > into upset? > > (or "other-src" or whatever) Reminder: > > It's pretty complicated to add. If you specify external-src > it will potentially have to add test, prev, curr entries for > the packages. > > However, IMO, it makes sense for this option to actually be > passed into setup.ini so that setup.exe can understand that > this is basically a symbolic link rather than a "copy". Setup doesn't need any changes - the source: tag has all the functionality Chuck needs now. It'll only download the file once (well, there are some corner cases, but relatively few and far between). > I don't remember if Robert already indicated which method > he'd prefer. Maybe he already has plans to do the right thing > when multiple packages refer to the same source tar ball. I > seem to recall that this came up before but I don't remember > what the decision was. I think that the easiest way is to allow setup.hint: to include the literal source: tag. As far as setup.ini's lex and yacc rules, any valid path is ok, so there is no need to consider adding a new tag. Rob
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 12:17:54PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >Oh yeah -- speaking of changes to setup.ini: > >Chris, can we get that "external-src: other-pkg-name" thing into upset? > (or "other-src" or whatever) Reminder: It's pretty complicated to add. If you specify external-src it will potentially have to add test, prev, curr entries for the packages. However, IMO, it makes sense for this option to actually be passed into setup.ini so that setup.exe can understand that this is basically a symbolic link rather than a "copy". So, if I just add this as a pass-through, it is a no-brainer. If I add it as a "fill in the blanks" in setup.ini, it's more complicated. It's not hellishly more complicated but I'd rather not do the work if it makes sense for the logic to live in setup.exe. I don't remember if Robert already indicated which method he'd prefer. Maybe he already has plans to do the right thing when multiple packages refer to the same source tar ball. I seem to recall that this came up before but I don't remember what the decision was. cgf
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
Thats what I had typed, outlook wrapped the lines. Rob - Original Message - From: "Lapo Luchini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 9:16 AM Subject: Re: RFC: setup.ini change > > > > > >install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 > >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e > >source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 > >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f > > > >Any preference folk? > > > > > Why don't directly inline? (filename length md5sum) > > install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e > source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f > > Lapo > > -- > Lapo 'Raist' Luchini > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) > http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796) > > > >
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
> > >>>install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 >>>158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >>>source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >>>158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f >>> >>>Any preference folk? >>> >>> >>> >>Why don't directly inline? (filename length md5sum) >> >>install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >>source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f >> >> >I'm guessing you didn't notice that Rob's proposal was "inline". It's >various email clients that are doing the apparent line wrap (as you'll >notice with your email above). > > I wonder why my "proposal" didn't get wrapped ?_? Must be the wrapping of Rob's mailer, not mine.. but anyhow.. I vote for that option 0=) -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
At 07:16 PM 4/29/2002, Lapo Luchini wrote: >>install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 >>158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >>source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >>158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f >> >>Any preference folk? >> >Why don't directly inline? (filename length md5sum) > >install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f I'm guessing you didn't notice that Rob's proposal was "inline". It's various email clients that are doing the apparent line wrap (as you'll notice with your email above). Larry Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] RFK Partners, Inc. http://www.rfk.com 838 Washington Street (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office Holliston, MA 01746 (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
> > >install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f > >Any preference folk? > > Why don't directly inline? (filename length md5sum) install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f Lapo -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
Oh yeah -- speaking of changes to setup.ini: Chris, can we get that "external-src: other-pkg-name" thing into upset? (or "other-src" or whatever) Reminder: setup.hint (for libncurses6) sdesc: ldesc: requires: cygwin terminfo external-src: ncurses setup.ini @ libncurses6 @ sdesc: ldesc: requires: cygwin terminfo install: release/ncurses/libncurses6/libncurses6-5.2-8.tar.bz2 ... source: release/ncurses/ncurses-5.2-8-src.tar.bz2 ... [prev] install: release/ncurses/libncurses6/libncurses6-5.2-7.tar.bz2 ... source: release/ncurses/ncurses-5.2-7-src.tar.bz2 ... That is, when it sees "external-src" it hunts for the -src package of the specified package, with the version matching the pendant package, and uses that. --Chuck
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
Robert Collins wrote: > install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 > 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e > source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 > 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f I like the idea. > To help deal with this I suggest the following approach: > with the new version I want to release, we include the new format ini > parser, but do nothing with the data. Then we can introduce features to > use it at our leisure. Yep. --Chuck
Re: RFC: setup.ini change
Given the way that md5 checksums are generated on sourceware currently, this would be a problem. The checksums are generated asynchronously with the creation of setup.ini. I would prefer the three column version of install/source, though. Slightly less work for me. cgf On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 11:28:20PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: >I'd like to change this: >install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 >source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 > >to > >install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f > >or > >install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 >install-md5: 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e >source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 >source-md5: 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f > >I don't care which we choose. My preference is the first one - it will >keep the files smaller. Either will cause setup.exe to barf when first >introduced. Likewise for third party parsers that are ... pedantic. > >To help deal with this I suggest the following approach: >with the new version I want to release, we include the new format ini >parser, but do nothing with the data. Then we can introduce features to >use it at our leisure. > >Any preference folk? > >Rob
RFC: setup.ini change
I'd like to change this: install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 to install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f or install: release/bash/bash-2901.tar.bz2 276403 install-md5: 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9e source: release/bash/bash-2901-src.tar.bz2 1892899 source-md5: 158044165a04791968a7e7fc8daaef9f I don't care which we choose. My preference is the first one - it will keep the files smaller. Either will cause setup.exe to barf when first introduced. Likewise for third party parsers that are ... pedantic. To help deal with this I suggest the following approach: with the new version I want to release, we include the new format ini parser, but do nothing with the data. Then we can introduce features to use it at our leisure. Any preference folk? Rob
