Re: [blfs-dev] Package Currency
Em 12-03-2014 00:30, Bruce Dubbs escreveu: Bruce Dubbs wrote: Today I've been working on the package currency scripts at http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/blfs-currency.html Most of the scripts are working, but I still need to address a few issues that have changed since I first wrote them last Fall. In any case the info there seems to be mostly correct. I'll finish up the outstanding issues in the next day or so. There are a fair number of packages out of date that are not in the ticket system. If someone want to go through and add new tickets for the out of date packages, please do so. It took me all day to wrestle these scripts into shape. The main problem is upstream devs who think it's clever to hide their directory listings of the packages they offer. They spend time making clever html files that are automatically generated but that just makes it quite difficult to extract just what is the latest release. The naming of files is also quite inconsistent. For example, we have junit4_4.11.orig.tar.gz. First why do they need to tell us it's version 4 twice. Second, why do they need to add 'orig'. What else would it be? Binary? If so, then for what architecture? Actually junit is java and you don't have binaries. In any case the scripts are current. If the 'Latest' version is a 0, then it means that either the upstream server is down or someone was clever and changed a file name or web page. There was at least one server down today: 0pointer.de. We have several packages pointing there. I've noticed it being down in the past. It doesn't seem to be very reliable. If you notice something wrong, please let me know, but please also tell me what the correct URL is that I can use to determine the most recent released version of the package. Thanks for it. I just looked at Programming, because was trying to find what you did with OJDK (sorry, only today I have seen your query). Then, I saw: python2 2.7.6 0 * python2 docs2.7.6 2.7.6 I believe the address is http://legacy.python.org/ftp/python/2.7.6/ -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Package Currency
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 10:30:13PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: The naming of files is also quite inconsistent. For example, we have junit4_4.11.orig.tar.gz. First why do they need to tell us it's version 4 twice. Second, why do they need to add 'orig'. What else would it be? Binary? If so, then for what architecture? Actually junit is java and you don't have binaries. Standard debian (and its derivatives, in this case ubuntu) - they probably have a policy for it, along with the underscore in the name. Remember that debian has some very old versions of certain packages, and that different packages may depend on either the old or the new versions. So in this case, it's like libcap which they named as libcap2 when we were using them for the source. The 4.11 tells us the actual version. The '.orig' confirms it is upstream (sometimes there is an abbreviation dfsg (debian free software guidelines) which I _believe_ indicates that certain parts of the source have been removed for licencing issues. Depending on the age of the package, sometimes there is also a '.debian.tar.gz' which contains the debian files for modifying their build system, as well as patches, changelog, list of files installed, etc. Their binaries are normally packaged as _*.deb files, with an indication of the architecture such as amd64, armel, armhf, i386, ia64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc and perhaps some other linux arches, as well as the non-linux. in the case of java the binary is _all.deb : for debian itself, junit is still at 3.8.2. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-dev] Freetype has reorganized header folders
Just a note to mention that Freetype recently changed its header folder layout from... /usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config to... /usr/include/freetype2/config http://openbsd.7691.n7.nabble.com/HEADS-UP-FreeType-header-reorg-td240916.html Anyway, I'm building a new BLFS system from a recent development version of the book and so far a couple of packages (not mentioned in the book) failed to build because of Freetype's headers (or their own failure to find them). The first time I fiddled with the package's source files. When it happened a second time, I recreated that erstwhile freetype subfolder and copied the contents of freetype2 there, too. There's probably some more elegant way, but it's working. I guess it's not your responsibility to deal with merely a potential issue caused by a third party's source code's inadequacy. I still thought perhaps one of those warning or note boxes, for a while, might help some poor slob (me) figure out why something looking for Freetype didn't go. Arthur -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
