Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Federico Hernandez wrote: > Hi! > > Just a ping to remember about this waiting to be reviewed package: Sorry for the delay! > You can get the 3 required files from: > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint Looks correct. > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.src.tar.bz2 Builds OK from source, but you didn't use either cygport or GBS, so it doesn't install /usr/share/doc/Cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.README when following your instructions. Given how simple the packaging is, I reckon you should be able to build it from just the most trivial cygport file. Have a go with the attached; shove them in a temp directory anywhere, run "cygport task-1.7.1-1 download" followed by "cygport task-1.7.1-1 all". > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 Packaging is correct. I dunno whether the fact that the README doesn't get rebuilt is enough for it to be rejected, but if you'd care to have a go with cygport that problem wouldn't arise. cheers, DaveK DESCRIPTION="Task 1.7.1" HOMEPAGE="http://taskwarrior.org/"; SRC_URI="http://www.taskwarrior.org/download/task-1.7.1.tar.gz"; --- origsrc/task-1.7.1/CYGWIN-PATCHES/README 1970-01-01 00:00:00.0 + +++ src/task-1.7.1/CYGWIN-PATCHES/README 2009-06-21 23:00:44.46875 +0100 @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +task 1.7.1-1 +-- + +A command-line to do list manager that can be used +with the gtd system. + +Runtime requirements: + cygwin-1.5.25 or newer + libncurses + +Build requirements: + cygwin-1.5.25 or newer + gcc-3.4.4-1 or newer + libncurses-devel + +Canonical homepage: + http://taskwarrior.org + +Canonical download: + http://taskwarrior.org/download + +License: + GPLv2+ + +Language: + C++ + + + +Build instructions: + unpack task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 +if you use setup to install this src package, +it will be unpacked under /usr/src automatically + cd /usr/src/task-1.7.1-1 + ./configure --prefix=/usr + make + make install + + + +task was packaged for cygwin by +Federico Hernandez and +is licensed under the GPL + + task-1.7.1-1 -- 2009-06-17 --- origsrc/task-1.7.1/CYGWIN-PATCHES/setup.hint 1970-01-01 00:00:00.0 + +++ src/task-1.7.1/CYGWIN-PATCHES/setup.hint 2009-06-21 22:57:01.96875 +0100 @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +# setup.hint for task 1.7.1-1 +category: Utils +requires: libncurses9 cygwin +sdesc: A command-line to do list manager +ldesc: "Task is a command-line to do list manager. +It has support for GTD functionality and includes +the following features: tags, colorful tabular output, +reports and graphs, lots of manipulation commands, +low-level API, abbreviations for all commands and +options, multiuser file locking, recurring tasks."
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
On 21/06/2009 17:39, Dave Korn wrote: Federico Hernandez wrote: http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint Looks correct. I thought cgf just said 'cygwin' was not to be in requires: anymore... Yaakov
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On 21/06/2009 17:39, Dave Korn wrote: >> Federico Hernandez wrote: >>> http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint >> >>Looks correct. > > I thought cgf just said 'cygwin' was not to be in requires: anymore... I forgot! Yes,, Frederico please take note. cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Hi Dave (and Yaakov) THX for the feedback regarding the packaging of task. And sorry for me "pinging" (we had a couple of user who have been asking for task in cygwin though...) I have now fixed the 2 remarks you had: 1) setup.hint removed dependency to cygwin in requires (but http://cygwin.com/setup.html should be update regarding this as it still advises to require cygwin) 2) task-1.7.1-1.src.tar.bz2 OK. Now I understand. I miss-understood the instructions. Thought that only the ready build binary package should install and contain the README file. And not the manual user build. I have now switched to cyport as you recommended (THX for the patches). I have included 2 small changes in the patch file: above mentioned requirement for cygwin disappers and I have also changed the build instructions to use cygport (using ideas and templates for the text from other packages using cygport). I have now re-uploaded the packages (without bumping the version number as the package is not yet in cygwin). So I would appreciate if you could take a new look at the new files at http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 Let me know if there are any problems. And thx for your time. /Federico
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
> I have now fixed the 2 remarks you had: > > 1) setup.hint > ... > 2) task-1.7.1-1.src.tar.bz2 > ... > > So I would appreciate if you could take a new look at the new files at > > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 Apart from the fixed packages of task fro cygwin-1.5 I have now also uploaded packages for cygwin-1.7. So you can find the packages for the review and upload under cygwin-1.5) http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 cygwin-1.7) http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/setup.hint http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 THX for your time and help. /Federico
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Federico Hernandez wrote: > Apart from the fixed packages of task fro cygwin-1.5 I have now also > uploaded packages for cygwin-1.7. > > So you can find the packages for the review and upload under Hi Frederico, If nobody beats me to it, I'll take a look at these over the weekend. Thanks for your continued patience :-) cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Hi Dave. > If nobody beats me to it, I'll take a look at these over the weekend. > Thanks for your continued patience :-) Not a problem at all. Good to know about the plans. THX. /Federico
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Federico Hernandez wrote: > Apart from the fixed packages of task fro cygwin-1.5 I have now also > uploaded packages for cygwin-1.7. > > So you can find the packages for the review and upload under > > cygwin-1.5) > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/setup.hint Looks fine. > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 Works and regenerates the package precisely. > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 Correct packaging. Installed and checked that a couple of basic commands worked (they did). AFAICS this one is GTG. > cygwin-1.7) > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/setup.hint > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 > http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 Urrgh. I see you noticed a problem of some sort. It appears to install a duplicate set of docs into both usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 and usr/share/doc/task, and you've had to add a few packaging definitions to get around it; quite possibly as a side-effect of this, the cygwin-specific readme gets installed as usr/share/doc/Cygwin/task.README, without any version number. Also, you choose to keep usr/share/doc/task and drop usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1, which I think is the wrong way round. I'll see if I can find a fix for you. Hang on in there a little while ... cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Dave Korn wrote: > Federico Hernandez wrote: >> cygwin-1.7) >> http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/setup.hint >> http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/task-1.7.1-1-src.tar.bz2 >> http://taskwarrior.org/download/cygwin/1.7/task-1.7.1-1.tar.bz2 > > Urrgh. I see you noticed a problem of some sort. It appears to install a > duplicate set of docs into both usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 and > usr/share/doc/task This appears to be intentional behaviour on the part of cygport at first glance. I removed the PKG_* and DOCS definitions from the .cygport file to see what a normal build would look like. After the cygport install stage, I have this: $ find task-1.7.1-1/inst/ task-1.7.1-1/inst/ task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/bin task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/bin/task.exe task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/Cygwin task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/Cygwin/task.README task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task/AUTHORS task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task/ChangeLog task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task/COPYING task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task/NEWS task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task/README task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/AUTHORS task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/ChangeLog task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/COPYING task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/INSTALL task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/NEWS task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/README task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/task_completion.sh task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/man task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/man/man1 task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/man/man1/task.1.gz task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/man/man5 task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/man/man5/taskrc.5.gz ... but if I run the install manually from the build dir into a fresh install dir: $ cd task-1.7.1-1/build/ $ make DESTDIR=/tmp/task/regen4/task-1.7.1-1/inst2 install $ cd ../.. ... I only see one set of docs, in the place where I'd expect to find it: $ find task-1.7.1-1/inst2/ task-1.7.1-1/inst2/ task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/bin task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/bin/task.exe task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/AUTHORS task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/ChangeLog task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/COPYING task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/INSTALL task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/NEWS task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/README task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/task_completion.sh task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/man task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/man/man1 task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/man/man1/task.1 task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/man/man5 task-1.7.1-1/inst2/usr/share/man/man5/taskrc.5 I'll take a look through cygport and see if I can understand what it's doing and why. Yaakov, are you out there by any chance? cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Hi Dave Thx for your time and help. It's appreciated. Great news about the task package for 1.5. As you have mentioned that it is GTG - will you upload it then and when. I just ask so that the upstream prpject could inform users about this. Now regarding 1.7: > This appears to be intentional behaviour on the part of cygport at first > glance. I removed the PKG_* and DOCS definitions from the .cygport file to > see what a normal build would look like. After the cygport install stage, I > have this: > > task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task > ... > task-1.7.1-1/inst/usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 As I saw this 2 DOCDIRS I thought that cygport has changed from 1.5 to 1.7 and looked around other packages how they get installed in cygwin 1.7 - for example wget. This one puts everything into /usr/share/doc/wget. So I assumed that this is the new "standard" to omit the version number of the package. Since the upstream project choosed to install the documentation in a "versioned" DOCDIR I decided that I had to add the PKG_* and DOCS definitions to the cygport file to as well have an unversioned DOCDIR for task like the other packages in cygwin 1.7. How should we proceed. Is the package otherwise OK? Apart for this. Do you want me to change something else? /Federico PS I have another question: For the future how would updates/new version of the package be handled. As I have seen I would post a RFU (Request for update) to this mailinglist. Is that correct?
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Federico Hernandez wrote: > Great news about the task package for 1.5. As you have mentioned that > it is GTG - will you upload it then and when. I just ask so that the > upstream prpject could inform users about this. http://cygwin.com/setup.html#submitting The normal procedure (see "Package acceptation") is that after getting a GTG for your new package, you send an RFU separately and then whichever of cgf and corinna gets to it first uploads. I'm not sure it would be right for the reviewer to go ahead and upload it directly - having a second pair of eyes helps catch anything the reviewer might have missed, like for instance this: > # setup.hint for task 1.7.1-1 > category: Utils > requires: libncurses9 > sdesc: A command-line to do list manager > ldesc: "Task is a command-line to do list manager. > It has support for GTD functionality and includes > the following features: tags, colorful tabular output, > reports and graphs, lots of manipulation commands, > low-level API, abbreviations for all commands and > options, multiuser file locking, recurring tasks." I think you should replace "to do list" by "to-do list" or maybe "TO-DO list" throughout :-) > Now regarding 1.7: > >> This appears to be intentional behaviour on the part of cygport at first >> glance. > As I saw this 2 DOCDIRS I thought that cygport has changed from 1.5 to > 1.7 and looked around other packages how they get installed in cygwin > 1.7 - for example wget. This one puts everything into > /usr/share/doc/wget. So I assumed that this is the new "standard" to > omit the version number of the package. It does seem to be. I looked at /usr/share/doc and saw a lot of packages that did have versions and a lot that didn't; but now I try again (using 'ls -rt' this time) I see that it tends to be older packages that haven't been updated in a while. > Since the upstream project choosed to install the documentation in a > "versioned" DOCDIR I decided that I had to add the PKG_* and DOCS > definitions to the cygport file to as well have an unversioned DOCDIR > for task like the other packages in cygwin 1.7. This seems right, but I noticed a couple of hints that suggest it isn't working right. First off, during the build, I see that the configure line includes "--docdir=/usr/share/doc/task"; but after the build, the docs end up in .../doc/task-1.7.1, which is strange. And the technique of using a tar --exclude option in PKG_CONTENTS[0] causes a warning from cygport when it is surprised to find the excluded files didn't end up in the tarball: Checking packages for missing or duplicate files > *** Warning: Packages are missing files: > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/AUTHORS > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/COPYING > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/ChangeLog > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/INSTALL > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/NEWS > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/README > -usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1/task_completion.sh > Creating source patches I am led to wonder if there is some different behaviour between autoconf versions that is confusing cygport. > How should we proceed. Is the package otherwise OK? Apart for this. Do > you want me to change something else? The package is fundamentally OK. I recommend changing the wording of setup.hint as suggested above, for both 1.5 and 1.7 versions, but it's only a minor nicety, not critical. So for the docs, there are three things we could conceivably do: 1) Nothing. Live with the warning, and assume the lack of versions on the README and docs/task dir are the correct thing to do. (We should have a quick google through the list archives and see if we can find a post discussing this standard). 2) Remove the PKG_* and DOCS definitions from your cygport, and add a line reading: _CYGPORT_RESTRICT_postinst_doc_=1 This gets us a package in the 1.5 style, with versioned Cygwin/README and doc/ dirs. 3) Wait a while and see if Yaakov (cygport maintainer) can help us out here. I'll try a build using autoconf-2.61 instead of -2.63 and see if that makes any difference. > PS I have another question: For the future how would updates/new > version of the package be handled. As I have seen I would post a RFU > (Request for update) to this mailinglist. Is that correct? Yep, apart from the "U" stands for "Upload", not "Update!" See the section "Updating a package" at the URL I linked above, and http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#RFU cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Dave Korn wrote: > I'll try a build using autoconf-2.61 instead of -2.63 and see if that makes > any difference. ROFL. I tried it with autoconf-2.59 and got this error: Compiling task-1.7.1-1 > autoreconf: Entering directory `.' > autoreconf: configure.ac: not using Gettext > autoreconf: running: aclocal --force > configure.ac:4: error: Autoconf version 2.61 or higher is required > configure.ac:4: the top level > autom4te: /usr/bin/m4 failed with exit status: 63 > aclocal: autom4te failed with exit status: 63 > autoreconf: aclocal failed with exit status: 63 > *** ERROR: autoreconf failed ... so I tried again with autoconf-2.61 ... only to see: > *** Info: patch task-1.7.1-1.src.patch not found Compiling task-1.7.1-1 > autoreconf-2.61: Entering directory `.' > autoreconf-2.61: configure.ac: not using Gettext > autoreconf-2.61: running: aclocal --force > configure.ac:35: error: Autoconf version 2.62 or higher is required > /usr/share/aclocal-1.11/init.m4:26: AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE is expanded from... > configure.ac:35: the top level > autom4te-2.61: /usr/bin/m4 failed with exit status: 63 > aclocal-1.11: autom4te failed with exit status: 63 > autoreconf-2.61: aclocal failed with exit status: 63 > *** ERROR: autoreconf failed So I tried using automake-1.10 as well as autoconf-2.61, and that just gave me the same behaviour as using the latest versions: an extra doc dir that has to be excluded at PKG_ time. Humph. Perhaps there's actually a problem with task's makefiles or configury not understanding "--docdir=/usr/share/doc/task" correctly? cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Dave Korn wrote: > Perhaps there's actually a problem with task's makefiles or configury not > understanding "--docdir=/usr/share/doc/task" correctly? This is task-1.7.1/Makefile.am: > SUBDIRS = src > EXTRA_DIST = task_completion.sh doc/man1/task.1 doc/man5/taskrc.5 > man1_MANS = doc/man1/task.1 > man5_MANS = doc/man5/taskrc.5 > otherdir = $(datadir)/doc/task-$(VERSION) > other_DATA = AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING INSTALL NEWS README task_completion.sh That does seem a funny way to do things to me, and it obviously ignores $docdir. You might want to discuss this upstream; the autoconf-2.63 documentation defines those two variables as: -- Variable: datadir The directory for installing idiosyncratic read-only architecture-independent data. -- Variable: docdir The directory for installing documentation files (other than Info and man). so you want to allow for the possibility that the user will have changed one or the other on the configure command-line. cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Dave Korn wrote: > Perhaps there's actually a problem with task's makefiles or configury not > understanding "--docdir=/usr/share/doc/task" correctly? This is task-1.7.1/Makefile.am: > SUBDIRS = src > EXTRA_DIST = task_completion.sh doc/man1/task.1 doc/man5/taskrc.5 > man1_MANS = doc/man1/task.1 > man5_MANS = doc/man5/taskrc.5 > otherdir = $(datadir)/doc/task-$(VERSION) > other_DATA = AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING INSTALL NEWS README task_completion.sh That does seem a funny way to do things to me, and it obviously ignores $docdir. You might want to discuss this upstream; the autoconf-2.63 documentation defines those two variables as: -- Variable: datadir The directory for installing idiosyncratic read-only architecture-independent data. -- Variable: docdir The directory for installing documentation files (other than Info and man). so you want it to allow for the possibility that the user will have changed one or the other on the configure command-line. cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
> The normal procedure (see "Package acceptation") is that after getting a GTG
> for your new package, you send an RFU separately and then whichever of cgf and
> corinna gets to it first uploads. I'm not sure it would be right for the
> reviewer to go ahead and upload it directly - having a second pair of eyes
> helps catch anything the reviewer might have missed, like for instance this:
I will do then a RFU just for cygwin 1.5 for the time being - and
later on for 1.7.
> I think you should replace "to do list" by "to-do list" or maybe "TO-DO
> list" throughout :-)
You know, I/we had the capitalized "TO-DO" version first. And while
submitting it to Ubuntu/Debian then encouraged us to change it to "to
do". So I guess there are endless ways of writing this...
> includes "--docdir=/usr/share/doc/task"; but after the build, the docs end up
> in .../doc/task-1.7.1, which is strange. And the technique of using a tar
The Makefile.am file has a specific explicit mentioning of
docdir = $(datadir)/doc/${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}
> 2) Remove the PKG_* and DOCS definitions from your cygport, and add a line
> reading:
>
> _CYGPORT_RESTRICT_postinst_doc_=1
>
> This gets us a package in the 1.5 style, with versioned Cygwin/README and
> doc/ dirs.
I would tend to do this as it makes the "installed" base of files more
consistent acorss versions unless there is a reason/decision not to do
it anymore.
Again.
Thanks for the help.
/Federico
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Dave Korn wrote: [ a duplicate post] Oops. Sorry for the dup everybody. I blame it on Thunderbird's somewhat confused status-reporting: http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/5273/messagesuccessfullyfail.png cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Federico Hernandez wrote:
>> I think you should replace "to do list" by "to-do list" or maybe "TO-DO
>> list" throughout :-)
>
> You know, I/we had the capitalized "TO-DO" version first. And while
> submitting it to Ubuntu/Debian then encouraged us to change it to "to
> do". So I guess there are endless ways of writing this...
Well, I guess it makes sense to stay consistent with the other packages then.
>> includes "--docdir=/usr/share/doc/task"; but after the build, the docs end up
>> in .../doc/task-1.7.1, which is strange. And the technique of using a tar
>
> The Makefile.am file has a specific explicit mentioning of
>
> docdir = $(datadir)/doc/${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}
:) Heh, your email crossed with mine while I was rebooting my modem.
> I would tend to do this as it makes the "installed" base of files more
> consistent acorss versions unless there is a reason/decision not to do
> it anymore.
Well, 1.5 is basically moribund and 1.7 is going to introduce a whole new
bunch of ways of doing things that break with tradition, so consistency
between them might not be a relevant consideration. (That said, I don't
actually know whether this is a new standard way of doing things or not -
still got to go digging in the archives for that.)
cheers,
DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
No problem regarding the dupe...
> Well, I guess it makes sense to stay consistent with the other packages then.
;-) I could change it later on when task reaches 2.0 and will
introduce a whole lot of new things.
> > The Makefile.am file has a specific explicit mentioning of
> >
> > docdir = $(datadir)/doc/${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}
>
> :) Heh, your email crossed with mine while I was rebooting my modem.
I will discuss the docdir issue with upstream. Though it might not
result in a change for task 1.7.1 - but I could do a patch for cygwin
and supply it as a cygwinpatch file for cygport though.
> Well, 1.5 is basically moribund and 1.7 is going to introduce a whole new
> bunch of ways of doing things that break with tradition, so consistency
> between them might not be a relevant consideration. (That said, I don't
> actually know whether this is a new standard way of doing things or not -
> still got to go digging in the archives for that.)
Thx for your help with this. When I encountered the problem I started
aswell to search but didn't really know where to look first and how to
get further. There might have been a lot of discussion around this...
/Federico
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Dave Korn wrote: > Urrgh. I see you noticed a problem of some sort. It appears to install a > duplicate set of docs into both usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 and > usr/share/doc/task, and you've had to add a few packaging definitions to get > around it; quite possibly as a side-effect of this, the cygwin-specific readme > gets installed as usr/share/doc/Cygwin/task.README, without any version > number. Also, you choose to keep usr/share/doc/task and drop > usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1, which I think is the wrong way round. >From the cygport NEWS file: 0.9.2: * SRC_URI: now accepts SRPMs. * PATCH_URI: now accepts multiple-patch tarballs. * Installs documentation into /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE. This is a deliberate change between 0.4.x for cygwin-1.5, and 0.9.x for cygwin-1.7. However, it relies on the underlying package understanding and working with docdir (for older autoconf) datarootdir (for newer autoconf) So, if upstream task doesn't use the "correct" variables, then cygport is going to have trouble. It will manually install some of the doc files into /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE, while the base package's make install might install some sub- or super- or disjoint set of files into $where_ever. I haven't looked at this specific underlying package. -- Chuck
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Charles Wilson wrote: > Dave Korn wrote: >> Urrgh. I see you noticed a problem of some sort. It appears to install a >> duplicate set of docs into both usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1 and >> usr/share/doc/task, and you've had to add a few packaging definitions to get >> around it; quite possibly as a side-effect of this, the cygwin-specific >> readme >> gets installed as usr/share/doc/Cygwin/task.README, without any version >> number. Also, you choose to keep usr/share/doc/task and drop >> usr/share/doc/task-1.7.1, which I think is the wrong way round. > > From the cygport NEWS file: > > 0.9.2: > * SRC_URI: now accepts SRPMs. > * PATCH_URI: now accepts multiple-patch tarballs. > * Installs documentation into /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE. > > This is a deliberate change between 0.4.x for cygwin-1.5, and 0.9.x for > cygwin-1.7. Ah, I found the thread: "[RFC] 1.7 Packaging: Documentation", beginning 15/08/2008 08:43 on -apps. Righto, so the unversioned ones are the correct ones to keep. > However, it relies on the underlying package understanding > and working with >docdir (for older autoconf) >datarootdir (for newer autoconf) > > So, if upstream task doesn't use the "correct" variables, then cygport > is going to have trouble. It will manually install some of the doc > files into /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE, while the base package's make install > might install some sub- or super- or disjoint set of files into $where_ever. For such packages, there's always the _CYGPORT_RESTRICT_postinst_doc_ flag as a workaround, but it's better to fix the makefiles, either upstream or in a cygwin-specific .src.patch. cheers, DaveK
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
´Dave, > Ah, I found the thread: "[RFC] 1.7 Packaging: Documentation", beginning > 15/08/2008 08:43 on -apps. Righto, so the unversioned ones are the correct > ones to keep. > For such packages, there's always the _CYGPORT_RESTRICT_postinst_doc_ flag > as a workaround, but it's better to fix the makefiles, either upstream or in a > cygwin-specific .src.patch. So we will go without the version number. How would you prefer for me to change the package for 1.7. I can do a cygwin specific src patch if wanted. It seems as the better and cleaner solution. I will then provide a patch to upstream so that task 1.8 will be "correct" in terms of Makfile. I will do it throughout the week (some travelling coming up) Can you do another review next weekend? ;-) hinthint ;-) I assume I can post the RFU for cygwin 1.5 though. /Fredde
Re: [ITP] task-1.7.1-1 (pinging for awaiting review)
Federico Hernandez wrote: > I can do a cygwin specific src patch if wanted. It seems as the better > and cleaner solution. I will then provide a patch to upstream so that > task 1.8 will be "correct" in terms of Makfile. That sounds like a good way to proceed. > I will do it > throughout the week (some travelling coming up) Can you do another > review next weekend? ;-) hinthint ;-) Sure, NP. > I assume I can post the RFU for cygwin 1.5 though. Yep. cheers, DaveK
