http://pad.ubuntu.com/foundations-p-udd-planning
Review of 11.10
Package importer updates
* most work on importer and its reliability
* cope better with launchpad downtime
* mulltiple tarballs works
* no longer pretending to be james westby
* better import ordering
* xz import recently added, st
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 12:24:44PM -0400, James Westby wrote:
> In order to get some data on this I just looked back at 45 of these from
> the last month, and found:
>
> 9 that looked real, or at least feasible
> 2 that were caused by updates to .po files
> 4 that were caused by automaticall
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 12:30:54PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> I think Jonathan means that if you use -nc (no cleanup of build
> directory), you have to cd ../build-area/mypkg-1.0 to get to the build
> directory.
Yes, and then copy any changes to packaging back manually.
> Personally, I just
I added a command to builddeb, bzr get-orig-source. This helps with my
workflow where I build the package within the checked out sources.
e.g. traditional packaging workflow:
apt-get source kdetoys
cd kdetoys-1.0
debuild
debuild -nc
debuild -S
cd ..
dput ubuntu *changes
UDD workflow:
bzr b
I packaged bzr for openSUSE recently and it was suggested I send some
notes on how their build service compares to Launchpad.
One difference that surprised me is packages are built instantly as
soon as you commit. This can probably be seen as quite a waste of
build daemon time since it will be t
The new Ubuntu Packaging Guide is nearing completion but needs your help.
Browse it at http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/
Articles still to be written include
-traditional packaging
-working with Debian and upstreams
and in the knowledge base section articles needed on python, gnome,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:24:01PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 12:20 +0100, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:12:11PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > > My guess is that something like "bzr builddeb -- -nc" will leave
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:12:11PM +0200, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> My guess is that something like "bzr builddeb -- -nc" will leave the
> build directory in ../build-area around for inspection. You can then
> manually remove it afterwards.
It does but you then have to revert to non UDD commands to
In traditional packaging I would often build the package with debuild
then make some changes based on the compile (edit .install files, add
.symbols files etc) then check it works with debuild -nc then tidy up with
debuild -S.
Is there an equivalent in UDD with bzr-builddeb? If I run bzr
buildde
Writing the packaging guide chapter on patching highlighted for me
that patches don't always work well with UDD.
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-packaging-guide-team/ubuntu-packaging-guide/trunk/view/head:/patches-to-packages.rst
(line 90) What are people's favourite tactics for the .pc dire
I've been looking over the packaging guide for what needs done to it and issues
with UDD it reveals.
Here's my first merge proposal of various small improvements
https://code.launchpad.net/~jr/ubuntu-packaging-guide/fixes/+merge/67951
Bugs I found..
810564 merge-upstream fails if top directory
This merge means that with bzr 2.4 (trunk) bzr commit will set the
changelog from debian/changelog and set tags for any bugs closed in
the changelog.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr-builddeb/+bug/791893
Jonathan
- Forwarded message from nore...@launchpad.net -
Reply-To: mp+63...@code.la
12 matches
Mail list logo
