Re: [ITP] distcc

[Lapo Luchini]

Morrison, John wrote:

sdesc: "A fast, free, distributed C/C++ compiler"
ldesc: "is a program to distribute builds of C, C++, Objective C or
Objective C++ code across several machines on a network"
requires: gcc
category: Devel
 

I vote for this one with all the hands I've got!! 0=)
Great!
(didn't know it existed)

--
Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available)
http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)

Re: [ITP] distcc

[Christopher Faylor]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:55:51PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote:
>Morrison, John wrote:
>
>>sdesc: "A fast, free, distributed C/C++ compiler"
>>ldesc: "is a program to distribute builds of C, C++, Objective C or
>>Objective C++ code across several machines on a network"
>>requires: gcc
>>category: Devel
>> 
>>
>I vote for this one with all the hands I've got!! 0=)
>Great!

I vote for it, too.  I know it works ok, since I've built and used it
myself.  It will be nice to have an official package in the distribution.

cgf

Re: [ITP] distcc

[Daniel Reed]

On 2003-10-06T15:20+0100, Morrison, John wrote:
) ==
) Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may
) not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed
) to any third party without our permission. There is no intention to
) create any legally binding contract or other binding commitment through
) the use of this electronic communication unless it is issued in accordance
) with the Experian Limited standard terms and conditions of purchase or
) other express written agreement between Experian Limited and the recipient
) Experian Limited (registration number 653331)
) Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF

Can you clarify this note, or was its inclusion a mistake? Any message sent
to the cygwin-apps mailing list will be archived and made publicly available
via both an email and web interface. Additionally, if you were intending to
propose a package (or at least show a formal intent to package), some of the
content of your message will be reproduced in a pending packages list, and
possibly other publicly accessible forms.

Thanks,
-- 
Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/   http://naim.n.ml.org/
"A man that is truly great is he who makes the world his debtor."

Re: [ITP] distcc

[Frédéric L. W. Meunier]

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Daniel Reed wrote:

> On 2003-10-06T15:20+0100, Morrison, John wrote:
> ) ==
> ) Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may
> ) not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed
> ) to any third party without our permission. There is no intention to
> ) create any legally binding contract or other binding commitment through
> ) the use of this electronic communication unless it is issued in accordance
> ) with the Experian Limited standard terms and conditions of purchase or
> ) other express written agreement between Experian Limited and the recipient
> ) Experian Limited (registration number 653331)
> ) Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF
>
> Can you clarify this note, or was its inclusion a mistake? Any message sent
> to the cygwin-apps mailing list will be archived and made publicly available
> via both an email and web interface. Additionally, if you were intending to
> propose a package (or at least show a formal intent to package), some of the
> content of your message will be reproduced in a pending packages list, and
> possibly other publicly accessible forms.

I don't think he has any control over it. It appears a lot of
employers something along these lines to any delivered e-mail.

-- 
How to contact me - http://www.pervalidus.net/contact.html

RE: [ITP] distcc

[Morrison, John]

Frédéric L. W. Meunier wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Daniel Reed wrote:
> 
>> On 2003-10-06T15:20+0100, Morrison, John wrote:

work appended stuff

>> Can you clarify this note, or was its inclusion a mistake? Any
>> message sent to the cygwin-apps mailing list will be archived and
>> made publicly available via both an email and web interface.
>> Additionally, if you were intending to propose a package (or at
>> least show a formal intent to package), some of the content of your
>> message will be reproduced in a pending packages list, and possibly
>> other publicly accessible forms. 
> 
> I don't think he has any control over it. It appears a lot of
> employers something along these lines to any delivered e-mail.

Thanks Frédéric, you are correct, I don't have any choice.

J.


==
Information in this email and any attachments are confidential, and may
not be copied or used by anyone other than the addressee, nor disclosed
to any third party without our permission. There is no intention to
create any legally binding contract or other binding commitment through
the use of this electronic communication unless it is issued in accordance
with the Experian Limited standard terms and conditions of purchase or
other express written agreement between Experian Limited and the recipient
Experian Limited (registration number 653331)
Registered office: Talbot House, Talbot Street, Nottingham NG1 5HF

Re: [ITP] distcc - without company disclaimer

[Daniel Reed]

PROBLEM distcc

On 2003-10-08T15:59+0100, John Morrison wrote:
) > sdesc: "A fast, free, distributed C/C++ compiler"
) > ldesc: "is a program to distribute builds of C, C++, Objective C or
) > Objective C++ code across several machines on a network" requires: gcc
) > category: Devel
) 

) 

) 

One thing I noticed is that the documentation appears to be primarily in
usr/share/doc/distcc/, with copies of COPYING, INSTALL, README, and TODO in
usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/. I believe all documentation is expected to be
in usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, but surely there should be no duplicates.

Also, the package includes the *directory* usr/share/doc/Cygwin/, but there
are no files in it. There should be a Cygwin-specific file either called
distcc-2.11.1.README or distcc-2.11.1-1.README.

The package also includes the directory etc/postinstall/, which is empty.
Not a hold-up, but if you are re-packaging anyway feel free to zap it.

The usr/bin/distccd.exe file has a library dependency on cygpopt-0.dll,
which my test machine does not have. The only dependency listed in
setup.hint is "gcc"; it looks like you might need to add either "popt" or
"libpopt0".

distcc.exe, distccd.exe, and distccmon-text.exe all have a dependency on
cygwin1.dll, which should require an additional dependency on "cygwin". It
might seem intuitive that a Cygwin package requires "cygwin", and that
listing it is just a formality, but some packages truly might not depend on
"cygwin" (such as pure-documentation packages or pure-script packages).


So, in the binary package, the documentation needs to be consolidated into
usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, a Cygwin-specific README needs to be created
in usr/share/doc/Cygwin/, and etc/postinstall/ should probably be killed.
In setup.hint either "popt" or "libpopt0" should be required, and "cygwin"
should also be required.

I have not reviewed the functionality. (I am unfamiliar with the distcc
utility, perhaps someone who voted for it? :)

-- 
Daniel Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://naim-users.org/nmlorg/   http://naim.n.ml.org/
"If you place a small value on yourself, rest assured, the world will
not raise your price."

Re: [ITP] distcc - without company disclaimer

[Lapo Luchini]

Daniel Reed wrote:

The package also includes the directory etc/postinstall/, which is empty.
Not a hold-up, but if you are re-packaging anyway feel free to zap it.
 

This is a generic patch to automatically solve that problem 0=)

--- generic-build-script2003-08-30 00:29:06.755245600 +0200
+++ generic-build-script.new2003-10-10 19:51:36.385342800 +0200
@@ -107,9 +107,6 @@
  if [ ! -d ${instdir}${prefix}/share/doc/Cygwin ]; then \
mkdir -p ${instdir}${prefix}/share/doc/Cygwin ; \
  fi && \
-  if [ ! -d ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ]; then \
-mkdir -p ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ; \
-  fi && \
  templist=""; \
  for f in ${srcdir}/ANNOUNCE ${srcdir}/CHANGES ${srcdir}/INSTALL \
   ${srcdir}/KNOWNBUG ${srcdir}/LICENSE ${srcdir}/README \
@@ -132,7 +129,10 @@
fi ;\
  fi ;\
  if [ -f ${srcdir}/CYGWIN-PATCHES/postinstall.sh ] ; then \
-  /usr/bin/install -m 755 ${srcdir}/CYGWIN-PATCHES/postinstall.sh \
+if [ ! -d ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ]; then \
+  mkdir -p ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall ; \
+fi && \
+/usr/bin/install -m 755 ${srcdir}/CYGWIN-PATCHES/postinstall.sh \
  ${instdir}${sysconfdir}/postinstall/${PKG}.sh
  fi )
}
--
Lapo 'Raist' Luchini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available)
http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)

RE: [ITP] distcc - without company disclaimer

[John Morrison]

> From: Daniel Reed
>
> PROBLEM distcc
>
> On 2003-10-08T15:59+0100, John Morrison wrote:
>
> One thing I noticed is that the documentation appears to be primarily in
> usr/share/doc/distcc/, with copies of COPYING, INSTALL, README,
> and TODO in
> usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/. I believe all documentation is
> expected to be
> in usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, but surely there should be no duplicates.

This was the standard behaviour with the method 2 script.  I know I
should customise it for the package, but I don't want to tweak it
too much - I might end up breaking it!

> Also, the package includes the *directory* usr/share/doc/Cygwin/,
> but there
> are no files in it. There should be a Cygwin-specific file either called
> distcc-2.11.1.README or distcc-2.11.1-1.README.

Again, the method 2 script created this directory.  I *really* would like
to question the requirement for a document in there - what am I going to
say that the original docs don't?  I think that that directory should be
for documents written about cygwin tools, for example cygserver/which.

I'll try and add something...

> The package also includes the directory etc/postinstall/, which is empty.
> Not a hold-up, but if you are re-packaging anyway feel free to zap it.

There will be, I plan to add a postinstall script to set it up with
(less) user intervention.

> The usr/bin/distccd.exe file has a library dependency on cygpopt-0.dll,
> which my test machine does not have. The only dependency listed in
> setup.hint is "gcc"; it looks like you might need to add either "popt" or
> "libpopt0".

Thanks, I missed that one.

> distcc.exe, distccd.exe, and distccmon-text.exe all have a dependency on
> cygwin1.dll, which should require an additional dependency on "cygwin". It
> might seem intuitive that a Cygwin package requires "cygwin", and that
> listing it is just a formality, but some packages truly might not
> depend on
> "cygwin" (such as pure-documentation packages or pure-script packages).

This has been raised before on the list, afaicr packages don't need to
list cygwin as a dependancy.  But I'll add it...

> So, in the binary package, the documentation needs to be consolidated into
> usr/share/doc/distcc-2.11.1/, a Cygwin-specific README needs to be created
> in usr/share/doc/Cygwin/, and etc/postinstall/ should probably be killed.
> In setup.hint either "popt" or "libpopt0" should be required, and "cygwin"
> should also be required.
>
> I have not reviewed the functionality. (I am unfamiliar with the distcc
> utility, perhaps someone who voted for it? :)

Thanks for the review, it *is* appreciated, but don't let your new
position as package list maintainer bully you into reviewing all proposed
packages!  If people don't step-up to vote/review, it's going to be
quite obvious that the package shouldn't be part of the cygwin distro :)

I'll try and do the changes you recommend, but I'm away for the best
part of the next fortnight, so it might be after that I'm afraid.

Thanks again,

J.