Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/27 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Tuesday 26 January 2010 12:20:32 you wrote: 2010/1/26 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Tuesday 26 January 2010 02:02:52 you wrote: 2010/1/26 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Monday 25 January 2010 15:02:57 Ed Bartosh wrote: [chop] # Additional apt-get parameters config_opts['apt-get_options'] = '-o APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated=1' # Command to run after rootstrap unpacking config_opts['after_rootstrap'] = 'fakeroot apt-get -y -q %s install maemo-optify' % config_opts['apt-get_options'] I'm building fine in sbdmock unless the package calls maemo-optify. I don't see where after_rootstrap occurs in sbdmock, so I think that above `apt-get install` isn't being run (maemo-optify doesn't get installed in the chroot). How are you getting maemo-optify installed in every chroot? I'm using sbdmock with corresponding change. You can find it here: http://github.com/bartosh/sbdmock/tree/after_rootstrap The change was discussed with upstream author and merge request has been sent to him some time ago. It's not merged in his gir repo yet, but I hope it will be eventually. OK, I did build with your sbdmock git tree, but after_rootstrap not in the main branch. I see after_rootstrap in the origin/after_rootstrap branch. Is that the preferred branch to use? Is that the one you guys are running? Yes, as I said (see github url above). The other git repo, for those watching, is this one: http://github.com/kad/sbdmock This is upstream author's repo. Mine is forked from it. Cool, thx, things are moving along fine. :) I have seen this error though, any hints? Unpacking libimlib2 (from .../libimlib2_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb) ... dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libimlib2_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite `/opt', which is also in package base-files ... Errors were encountered while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/libimlib2_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb /var/cache/apt/archives/libimlib2-dev_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb E: Sub-process /scratchbox/devkits/debian-etch/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Yeah, I've seen this. The reason is the bug in SDK rootstraps. You can find the details in this thread: http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/2009-October/021588.html There is one more m-d thread you may be interested in. It's about automatic optification of packages by autobuilder: http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/2009-November/021992.html -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: Is there something needed other then rebuilding all lib packages to generate such informations? According to this [1], it seems so. Then again you could generate the first version automatically, but for subsequent versions we need some work from the packager. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Projects/ImprovedDpkgShlibdeps -- Javier ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Jeremiah Foster skrev: On Jan 25, 2010, at 22:27, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/25 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Interesting. Can you point me out to the one, which supports scratchbox? Why do you need scratchbox to build debs? Why not just use the debian toolchain? I know you don't want to learn perl, but hey, it works for debian. The Debian tools are not really designed for cross-compilation, they're meant to run inside the target environment. That target environment also needs a full complement of Debian tools, including compilers. The reason it works for Debian is because they have a LARGE farm of dedicated, donated machines of various architectures: http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi If someone builds a farm of Maemo devices (running on ARM, of course) that they want to dedicate to running buildds, then that might work. Otherwise, the Debian tools need to be run inside a simulated target environment, and the only simulated environment known to run Maemo (and that runs reasonably fast) is probably scratchbox... (I've been a Debian Developer for years, by the way.) Ove ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/26 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: On Jan 25, 2010, at 22:27, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/25 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Interesting. Can you point me out to the one, which supports scratchbox? Why do you need scratchbox to build debs? Why not just use the debian toolchain? I know you don't want to learn perl, but hey, it works for debian. Funny. Rebuilding with crosscompilation toolchain is better approach or course, but I doubt that it's easy doable for Maemo packages. It would require changes in big amount of packages. If you're brave enough you can try it. Just let me know and I will stop supporting current solution. Even not considering above you might notice, that Maemo SDK is based on scratchbox. So, second answer is 'Because Maemo SDK and all developers use it'. -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/26 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Monday 25 January 2010 15:02:57 Ed Bartosh wrote: [chop] # Additional apt-get parameters config_opts['apt-get_options'] = '-o APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated=1' # Command to run after rootstrap unpacking config_opts['after_rootstrap'] = 'fakeroot apt-get -y -q %s install maemo-optify' % config_opts['apt-get_options'] I'm building fine in sbdmock unless the package calls maemo-optify. I don't see where after_rootstrap occurs in sbdmock, so I think that above `apt-get install` isn't being run (maemo-optify doesn't get installed in the chroot). How are you getting maemo-optify installed in every chroot? I'm using sbdmock with corresponding change. You can find it here: http://github.com/bartosh/sbdmock/tree/after_rootstrap The change was discussed with upstream author and merge request has been sent to him some time ago. It's not merged in his gir repo yet, but I hope it will be eventually. -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Jan 26, 2010, at 9:43 AM, Ove Kaaven wrote: Jeremiah Foster skrev: On Jan 25, 2010, at 22:27, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/25 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Interesting. Can you point me out to the one, which supports scratchbox? Why do you need scratchbox to build debs? Why not just use the debian toolchain? I know you don't want to learn perl, but hey, it works for debian. The Debian tools are not really designed for cross-compilation, they're meant to run inside the target environment. Yeah, this seems to be the key differentiator between Maemo's build system and Debian's. Still, there was a SoC project last year in which we could have participated to help shape the debian build process to more closely match Maemo's. No one was interested. That target environment also needs a full complement of Debian tools, including compilers. The reason it works for Debian is because they have a LARGE farm of dedicated, donated machines of various architectures: http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi I find it fascinating that a Free Software operating system, without a very formal form of governance, without any assets of its own aside from SIP, run completely by volunteers, has a larger build farm than the world's leading handset manufacturer. If someone builds a farm of Maemo devices (running on ARM, of course) that they want to dedicate to running buildds, then that might work. Otherwise, the Debian tools need to be run inside a simulated target environment, and the only simulated environment known to run Maemo (and that runs reasonably fast) is probably scratchbox... What about tools like qemu and dpkg-cross? Can't they be used to build debs without scratchbox? And my goal is not to necessarily get rid of scratchbox, but rather enable alternatives to the current build toolchain. Mer builds packages on OBS - why can't we do that for Maemo? Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Jan 26, 2010, at 10:16 AM, Jeremiah Foster wrote: without any assets of its own aside from SIP I mean SPI of course. (Software in the Public Interest.) Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/26 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: On Jan 26, 2010, at 9:43 AM, Ove Kaaven wrote: Jeremiah Foster skrev: On Jan 25, 2010, at 22:27, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/25 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Interesting. Can you point me out to the one, which supports scratchbox? Why do you need scratchbox to build debs? Why not just use the debian toolchain? I know you don't want to learn perl, but hey, it works for debian. The Debian tools are not really designed for cross-compilation, they're meant to run inside the target environment. Yeah, this seems to be the key differentiator between Maemo's build system and Debian's. Still, there was a SoC project last year in which we could have participated to help shape the debian build process to more closely match Maemo's. No one was interested. That target environment also needs a full complement of Debian tools, including compilers. The reason it works for Debian is because they have a LARGE farm of dedicated, donated machines of various architectures: http://db.debian.org/machines.cgi I find it fascinating that a Free Software operating system, without a very formal form of governance, without any assets of its own aside from SIP, run completely by volunteers, has a larger build farm than the world's leading handset manufacturer. You're confusing Maemo and Nokia here. First, you most probably don't know how big farm Nokia uses internally. And, second, because of not using native compilation current Maemo build infrastructure is more than enough for what it does. However nothing prevents nobody to donate maney or computers for extending existing buildfarm. Maemo is free project, isn't it? -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Dnia wtorek, 26 stycznia 2010 o 09:43:01 Ove Kaaven napisał(a): The Debian tools are not really designed for cross-compilation, they're meant to run inside the target environment. That target environment also needs a full complement of Debian tools, including compilers. OpenEmbedded builds deb packages and root filesystems without having to be run on Debian based system and all in cross-compilation mode. The reason it works for Debian is because they have a LARGE farm of dedicated, donated machines of various architectures: If someone builds a farm of Maemo devices (running on ARM, of course) that they want to dedicate to running buildds, then that might work. You do not need Maemo devices - there are better ARM devices if you want to have native compilation farm. Think of BeagleBoard (with usb-network, usb- storage attached) or Sheevaplug devices (serial-ata storage, gigabit ethernet, more raw cpu power then n900 or beagleboard). Otherwise, the Debian tools need to be run inside a simulated target environment, and the only simulated environment known to run Maemo (and that runs reasonably fast) is probably scratchbox... Again - you do not need to run whole Maemo environment to be able to do builds. Fremantle_armel target do not have working Hildon - it works only for shell stuff. Regards, -- JID: h...@jabber.org Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Jeremiah Foster skrev: What about tools like qemu and dpkg-cross? Actually, come to think of it, I think what you're really looking for it Debian's qemubuilder package. Whether you can actually make it work with a distro like Maemo is still anyone's guess, though. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/26 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: What about tools like qemu and dpkg-cross? Can't they be used to build debs without scratchbox? And my goal is not to necessarily get rid of scratchbox, but rather enable alternatives to the current build toolchain. I still don't understand what's so bad with current toolchain and autobuilder? I'm asking not just out of curiosity, but because right now I have some free time and I'm going to spend it to improve autobuilder. My plan I was to implement the following features: - support for multiple packages builds - parallel package builds - improvements for external checks - support for building tags from garage VCS(svn and git) So, if it's not needed and community tends to switch to another build system I'd rather do something more useful. -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Jan 26, 2010, at 1:05 PM, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/26 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: What about tools like qemu and dpkg-cross? Can't they be used to build debs without scratchbox? And my goal is not to necessarily get rid of scratchbox, but rather enable alternatives to the current build toolchain. I still don't understand what's so bad with current toolchain and autobuilder? I'm asking not just out of curiosity, but because right now I have some free time and I'm going to spend it to improve autobuilder. My plan I was to implement the following features: - support for multiple packages builds - parallel package builds - improvements for external checks - support for building tags from garage VCS(svn and git) So, if it's not needed and community tends to switch to another build system I'd rather do something more useful. Personally I think it is highly useful the work you do. What I see as the bottleneck is the political aspect, not the technical aspect. Having alternative build environments frees us from having to rely on one autobuilder, one build machine, one process. If we could let in more community resources either through replication or distribution I think we can ease developers lives when the ISP fails to keep the autobuilder up. I realize that we again reach the limit that in order to build, we need proprietary software / tools / blobs so it will be impossible to replicate the current build toolchain, but having an independent, community managed (or assisted) build toolchain would seem to me useful and a worthy goal. Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/26 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: What about tools like qemu and dpkg-cross? Can't they be used to build debs without scratchbox? And my goal is not to necessarily get rid of scratchbox, but rather enable alternatives to the current build toolchain. I still don't understand what's so bad with current toolchain and autobuilder? I'm asking not just out of curiosity, but because right now I have some free time and I'm going to spend it to improve autobuilder. My plan I was to implement the following features: - support for multiple packages builds - parallel package builds - improvements for external checks - support for building tags from garage VCS(svn and git) So, if it's not needed and community tends to switch to another build system I'd rather do something more useful. Personally I think it is highly useful the work you do. Thank you. What I see as the bottleneck is the political aspect, not the technical aspect. Having alternative build environments frees us from having to rely on one autobuilder, one build machine, one process. If we could let in more community resources either through replication or distribution I think we can ease developers lives when the ISP fails to keep the autobuilder up. I realize that we again reach the limit that in order to build, we need proprietary software / tools / blobs so it will be impossible to replicate the current build toolchain, but having an independent, community managed (or assisted) build toolchain would seem to me useful and a worthy goal. I don't see that community should switch to another build system just because Maemo server infrastructure hosted on non-reliable ISP. From my point of veiw these 2 things are not related at all. All build tools are open. If community don't like this ISP and has ability to switch to alternative one it can move all infrastructure there. It has nothing to do with the changing build system. -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote: - support for building tags from garage VCS(svn and git) Would be nice to also allow fetching code from external VCS hosting services (gitorious for instance). Is that feasible? Maybe using the Vcs-* fields line in Debian?) Regards, -- Anderson Lizardo OpenBossa Labs - INdT Manaus - Brazil ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/26 Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org: On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote: - support for building tags from garage VCS(svn and git) Would be nice to also allow fetching code from external VCS hosting services (gitorious for instance). Is that feasible? Maybe using the Vcs-* fields line in Debian?) The reason why I'm planning to implement it only for garage projects is that I can use push method instead of polling. For garage it can be easy done by developing svn/git hooks. For external vcs it's harder. Fetching sources from there is also more time consuming than from garage. I'm not trying to say that it doesn't make sense to implement. Just want to start with easy task :) Let's see how this feature is used among developers first and then decide if we need to go further in this direction or not. -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Dnia wtorek, 26 stycznia 2010 o 13:05:41 Ed Bartosh napisał(a): I still don't understand what's so bad with current toolchain and autobuilder? I'm asking not just out of curiosity, but because right now I have some free time and I'm going to spend it to improve autobuilder. My plan I was to implement the following features: - support for multiple packages builds - parallel package builds - improvements for external checks - support for building tags from garage VCS(svn and git) So, if it's not needed and community tends to switch to another build system I'd rather do something more useful. Can you look at how Debian uses library symbols to handle versioned dependencies? Having this in autobuilder should solve this app require pr1.1 just because we upgraded sdk problems. Will probably also help to chinook/diablo packagers. Regards, -- JID: h...@jabber.org Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 12:52 +0100, Ove Kaaven wrote: Mer builds packages on OBS - why can't we do that for Maemo? I thought you wanted to use Debian tools? Besides, I believe OBS is based on a standard Debian install, which Mer probably aims to be compatible with, but Maemo isn't. (For those who don't know, I'm the build guy for Mer) I don't think it would be hard to build Fremantle in OBS. There may be some policy issues using the public OBS server (they don't like closed binaries) but Mer may be setting up a 'private' OBS anyhow to handle the opengl dev binaries - In general OBS is certainly a good approach IMHO. I spent a few minutes on this for fun last year and made good progress. My approach was to fake out scratchboxisms and it worked pretty damned well. Mer already uses a sophisticated (ie clever hack) debian derived cross-compiler with qemu - more info on the Mer Build pages. Actually there's a *lot* there :) Answering a later thread: OBS is working on linking to VCS too David ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:debehlp Can you look at how Debian uses library symbols to handle versioned dependencies? Having this in autobuilder should solve this app require pr1.1 just because we upgraded sdk problems. Will probably also help to chinook/diablo packagers. This is more a source packages issue than an autobuilder one. The autobuilder needs only updated debhelper; but all lib source packages need package.symbols file with each symbol and version. -- Javier ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
Dnia wtorek, 26 stycznia 2010 o 14:47:58 Javier S. Pedro napisał(a): Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:debehlp Can you look at how Debian uses library symbols to handle versioned dependencies? Having this in autobuilder should solve this app require pr1.1 just because we upgraded sdk problems. Will probably also help to chinook/diablo packagers. This is more a source packages issue than an autobuilder one. The autobuilder needs only updated debhelper; but all lib source packages need package.symbols file with each symbol and version. Is there something needed other then rebuilding all lib packages to generate such informations? Ok, not all of them are open, but at least open ones can get such infos. Regards, -- JID: h...@jabber.org Website: http://marcin.juszkiewicz.com.pl/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcinjuszkiewicz ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Tuesday 26 January 2010 02:02:52 you wrote: 2010/1/26 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Monday 25 January 2010 15:02:57 Ed Bartosh wrote: [chop] # Additional apt-get parameters config_opts['apt-get_options'] = '-o APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated=1' # Command to run after rootstrap unpacking config_opts['after_rootstrap'] = 'fakeroot apt-get -y -q %s install maemo-optify' % config_opts['apt-get_options'] I'm building fine in sbdmock unless the package calls maemo-optify. I don't see where after_rootstrap occurs in sbdmock, so I think that above `apt-get install` isn't being run (maemo-optify doesn't get installed in the chroot). How are you getting maemo-optify installed in every chroot? I'm using sbdmock with corresponding change. You can find it here: http://github.com/bartosh/sbdmock/tree/after_rootstrap The change was discussed with upstream author and merge request has been sent to him some time ago. It's not merged in his gir repo yet, but I hope it will be eventually. OK, I did build with your sbdmock git tree, but after_rootstrap not in the main branch. I see after_rootstrap in the origin/after_rootstrap branch. Is that the preferred branch to use? Is that the one you guys are running? The other git repo, for those watching, is this one: http://github.com/kad/sbdmock And Ed's is this one: http://github.com/bartosh/sbdmock Thanks, -Jeff Moe http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Tuesday 26 January 2010 12:20:32 you wrote: 2010/1/26 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Tuesday 26 January 2010 02:02:52 you wrote: 2010/1/26 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Monday 25 January 2010 15:02:57 Ed Bartosh wrote: [chop] # Additional apt-get parameters config_opts['apt-get_options'] = '-o APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated=1' # Command to run after rootstrap unpacking config_opts['after_rootstrap'] = 'fakeroot apt-get -y -q %s install maemo-optify' % config_opts['apt-get_options'] I'm building fine in sbdmock unless the package calls maemo-optify. I don't see where after_rootstrap occurs in sbdmock, so I think that above `apt-get install` isn't being run (maemo-optify doesn't get installed in the chroot). How are you getting maemo-optify installed in every chroot? I'm using sbdmock with corresponding change. You can find it here: http://github.com/bartosh/sbdmock/tree/after_rootstrap The change was discussed with upstream author and merge request has been sent to him some time ago. It's not merged in his gir repo yet, but I hope it will be eventually. OK, I did build with your sbdmock git tree, but after_rootstrap not in the main branch. I see after_rootstrap in the origin/after_rootstrap branch. Is that the preferred branch to use? Is that the one you guys are running? Yes, as I said (see github url above). The other git repo, for those watching, is this one: http://github.com/kad/sbdmock This is upstream author's repo. Mine is forked from it. Cool, thx, things are moving along fine. :) I have seen this error though, any hints? Unpacking libimlib2 (from .../libimlib2_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb) ... dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libimlib2_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite `/opt', which is also in package base-files ... Errors were encountered while processing: /var/cache/apt/archives/libimlib2_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb /var/cache/apt/archives/libimlib2-dev_1.4.0-1.2maemo2_armel.deb E: Sub-process /scratchbox/devkits/debian-etch/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Thanks 1000x! -Jeff Moe http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Jan 23, 2010, at 12:07, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/23 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: Could the configuration files of the build server and related scripts be put up on the wiki or mailed here or something? I had a build fail due to a small difference between the SDK and the buildbox. I would like to be able to have an identical setup to the build box before submitting jobs. BTW, what do you think about to prepare guide for developers for easy setup of local buld configurations identical to autobuilder ones? I can provide whatever information you need for that. Personally I think this is a great idea. Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Saturday 23 January 2010 04:07:48 Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/23 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: Could the configuration files of the build server and related scripts be put up on the wiki or mailed here or something? I had a build fail due to a small difference between the SDK and the buildbox. I would like to be able to have an identical setup to the build box before submitting jobs. It doesn't differ too much from what I showed in December[1] The only valuable difference I can see is that SDK have been changed. # Official SDK repositories: -deb http://repository.maemo.org/ fremantle/sdk free non-free -deb http://repository.maemo.org/ fremantle/tools free non-free +#deb http://stage/ fremantle/sdk free non-free +#deb http://stage/ fremantle/tools free non-free + +#revert PR1.1 because of backwards compatibility issue 2010-01-19 -Niels + +deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/sdk free non-free +deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/tools free non-free As you can see from the comment Niels did this change. BTW, what do you think about to prepare guide for developers for easy setup of local buld configurations identical to autobuilder ones? I can provide whatever information you need for that. Yes this would be very nice. I am starting to put all the scripts I use in a git archive on gitorious. As I set up sdbmock (starting from scratch again), I will add configs/scripts there: http://gitorious.org/freemoe/ git clone git://gitorious.org/freemoe/freemoe.git I was thinking of making a servers/ subdir and store specific configs for them in there (e.g. servers/espejo/rsync.d conf). The buildserver has been running nice and fast the last 48 hours or so--lots of packages have been pushed through. :) What distro/release is the build server running? I have generally set up Debian Lenny KVMs to use and have one set up to be used with sdbmock, but if something more recent or older is better, let me know. Thanks, -Jeff http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Mon, January 25, 2010 16:22, Jeff Moe wrote: On Saturday 23 January 2010 04:07:48 Ed Bartosh wrote: The buildserver has been running nice and fast the last 48 hours or so--lots of packages have been pushed through. :) Will be even better in the near future, there are still some delays that can be reduced. What distro/release is the build server running? I have generally set up Debian Lenny KVMs to use and have one set up to be used with sdbmock, but if something more recent or older is better, let me know. You are in luck. We run Debian Lenny on the builder too, so no need to change there. Of course having a dual quadcore Xeon helps too. Thanks, -Jeff http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba -- Niels Breet maemo.org webmaster ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Jan 25, 2010, at 16:22, Jeff Moe wrote: On Saturday 23 January 2010 04:07:48 Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/23 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: Could the configuration files of the build server and related scripts be put up on the wiki or mailed here or something? I had a build fail due to a small difference between the SDK and the buildbox. I would like to be able to have an identical setup to the build box before submitting jobs. It doesn't differ too much from what I showed in December[1] The only valuable difference I can see is that SDK have been changed. # Official SDK repositories: -deb http://repository.maemo.org/ fremantle/sdk free non-free -deb http://repository.maemo.org/ fremantle/tools free non-free +#deb http://stage/ fremantle/sdk free non-free +#deb http://stage/ fremantle/tools free non-free + +#revert PR1.1 because of backwards compatibility issue 2010-01-19 -Niels + +deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/sdk free non-free +deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/tools free non-free As you can see from the comment Niels did this change. BTW, what do you think about to prepare guide for developers for easy setup of local buld configurations identical to autobuilder ones? I can provide whatever information you need for that. Yes this would be very nice. I am starting to put all the scripts I use in a git archive on gitorious. As I set up sdbmock (starting from scratch again), I will add configs/scripts there: http://gitorious.org/freemoe/ git clone git://gitorious.org/freemoe/freemoe.git I was thinking of making a servers/ subdir and store specific configs for them in there (e.g. servers/espejo/rsync.d conf). The buildserver has been running nice and fast the last 48 hours or so--lots of packages have been pushed through. :) What distro/release is the build server running? I have generally set up Debian Lenny KVMs to use and have one set up to be used with sdbmock, but if something more recent or older is better, let me know. There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/25 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Interesting. Can you point me out to the one, which supports scratchbox? -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Saturday 23 January 2010 04:07:48 you wrote: BTW, what do you think about to prepare guide for developers for easy setup of local buld configurations identical to autobuilder ones? I can provide whatever information you need for that. Ok, I pushed my first successful package throught sdbmock armel extras-devel. The preliminary config files for the server are in the git repo, browsable here: http://gitorious.org/freemoe/freemoe/trees/master/servers/obra Also, can you give me an i386 example? How about scripts that process incoming jobs, etc? Thanks! -Jeff Moe http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/25 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: On Saturday 23 January 2010 04:07:48 you wrote: BTW, what do you think about to prepare guide for developers for easy setup of local buld configurations identical to autobuilder ones? I can provide whatever information you need for that. Ok, I pushed my first successful package throught sdbmock armel extras-devel. The preliminary config files for the server are in the git repo, browsable here: http://gitorious.org/freemoe/freemoe/trees/master/servers/obra Also, can you give me an i386 example? Here you go: #!/usr/bin/python -tt # Scratchbox target name config_opts['sbtarget'] = 'maemo5-i386' # Target settings. Used if invoked with -u flag config_opts['cputransparency-method'] = None # or none config_opts['compiler-name'] = 'cs2007q3-glibc2.5-i486' config_opts['devkits'] = 'perl:debian-lenny:doctools:svn:git' #config_opts['devkits'] = 'perl:debian-etch:doctools:svn:git:apt-https' config_opts['dpkg-buildpackage'] = 'dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -eAutomatic Builder buil...@maemo.org -sa -D' # Additional apt-get parameters config_opts['apt-get_options'] = '-o APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated=1' # Command to run after rootstrap unpacking config_opts['after_rootstrap'] = 'fakeroot apt-get -y -q %s install maemo-optify' % config_opts['apt-get_options'] # Location of rootstrap # # You can specify local path to file # example 1: archive located in /scratchbox/packages : # config_opts['rootstrap']=maemo-sdk-rootstrap_4.0_i386.tgz # # example 2: archive from original site # config_opts['rootstrap']=http://repository.maemo.org/stable/chinook/i386/maemo-sdk-rootstrap_4.0_i386.tgz; # # example 3: custom location inside scratchbox: # # config_opts['rootstrap']=/home/user/rootstraps/maemo-sdk-rootstrap_4.0_i386.tgz # config_opts['rootstrap']=/scratchbox/packages/maemo-sdk-rootstrap_5.0_i386.tgz #config_opts['rootstrap']=/scratchbox/packages/maemo-sdk-rootstrap_5.0_i386_update1.tgz config_opts['sources.list'] = # Official SDK repositories: #deb http://stage/ fremantle/sdk free non-free #deb http://stage/ fremantle/tools free non-free #revert PR1.1 because of backwards compatibility issue 2010-01-19 -Niels deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/sdk free non-free deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/tools free non-free # Development Extras repositories: deb http://repository.maemo.org/extras-devel/ fremantle free non-free # Nokia binaries deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo-sdk-nokia-binaries_5_update1 fremantle explicit # Following example should be safe for most cases (resolver*.opendns.com) # If not specified, content of host's /etc/resolv.conf used. #config_opts['files']['/etc/resolv.conf'] = #search maemo.org #nameserver 208.67.222.222 #nameserver 208.67.220.220 # # Special hacks to /host_usr/bin # This will automatically add export PATH=/host_usr/bin:$PATH # and redirection of binary from /usr/bin/binname to /host_usr/bin/binname config_opts['host_usr']['gconftool-2'] = #!/bin/sh export SBOX_REDIRECT_IGNORE=/usr/bin/gconftool-2 export GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=`/usr/bin/gconftool-2 --get-default-source` /usr/bin/gconftool-2 --config-source $GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE --direct $@ config_opts['env']['DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS']=parallel=4 config_opts['env']['TMP']=/var/tmp config_opts['env']['TEMP']=/var/tmp config_opts['env']['TMPDIR']=/var/tmp #config_opts['env']['http_proxy']=http://proxy.dmz:3128; How about scripts that process incoming jobs, etc? You can find current production version of buildme (builder for Maemo Extras) here: https://garage.maemo.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/tags/buildme/1.5.1/?root=extras-cauldron -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
On Jan 25, 2010, at 22:27, Ed Bartosh wrote: 2010/1/25 Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com: There are other build tools which are better documented and more flexible than sdbmock. Debian has a complete toolchain which is obviously good at building debs and is completely open and well supported. Interesting. Can you point me out to the one, which supports scratchbox? Why do you need scratchbox to build debs? Why not just use the debian toolchain? I know you don't want to learn perl, but hey, it works for debian. http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd/ Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
ext Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com writes: Why do you need scratchbox to build debs? You need it to build debs for Maemo, unfortunately. The Maemo SDK does not run anywhere else than in Scratchbox. (For example, last I looked, the Maemo SDK relies on /scratchbox/tools/bin/find being there. There is no /usr/bin/find.) ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Build Server Configuration
2010/1/23 Jeff Moe m...@blagblagblag.org: Could the configuration files of the build server and related scripts be put up on the wiki or mailed here or something? I had a build fail due to a small difference between the SDK and the buildbox. I would like to be able to have an identical setup to the build box before submitting jobs. It doesn't differ too much from what I showed in December[1] The only valuable difference I can see is that SDK have been changed. # Official SDK repositories: -deb http://repository.maemo.org/ fremantle/sdk free non-free -deb http://repository.maemo.org/ fremantle/tools free non-free +#deb http://stage/ fremantle/sdk free non-free +#deb http://stage/ fremantle/tools free non-free + +#revert PR1.1 because of backwards compatibility issue 2010-01-19 -Niels + +deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/sdk free non-free +deb file:/scratchbox/packages/maemo5.0_update1_public/ fremantle/tools free non-free As you can see from the comment Niels did this change. BTW, what do you think about to prepare guide for developers for easy setup of local buld configurations identical to autobuilder ones? I can provide whatever information you need for that. [1] http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/2009-December/023162.html -- BR, Ed ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Build Server Configuration
Could the configuration files of the build server and related scripts be put up on the wiki or mailed here or something? I had a build fail due to a small difference between the SDK and the buildbox. I would like to be able to have an identical setup to the build box before submitting jobs. Thanks, -Jeff Moe http://wiki.maemo.org/User:Jebba ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
