Re: Packaging questions
On Feb 9, 2010, at 2:29 PM, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Ajai Khattri wrote: Maybe there ought to be a link to the dh_make man page from there? Which docs were you following, and how did you get there? we're trying to make http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging the standard quick start page, and http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Packaging%2C_Deploying_and_Distributing and http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ the definitive more than you ever needed or wanted to know about Debian packaging, but were too afraid to ignore pages. I think it is great that we have a limited number of 'canonical' documentation so that we have a central place to send people and so that we can all work on making those central docs definitive and understandable. Is it then considered this way; 1. http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging Quick Start 2. http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Packaging%2C_Deploying_and_Distributing Complete Maemo Guide 3. http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ Authoritative Source If this is the way we are seeing it, I can then direct people to those documents and focus my energies there making sure they are up-to-date and complete. Jeremiah___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
Hi, Jeremiah Foster wrote: Is it then considered this way; 1. http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging Quick Start 2. http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Packaging%2C_Deploying_and_Distributing Complete Maemo Guide 3. http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ Authoritative Source If this is the way we are seeing it, I can then direct people to those documents and focus my energies there making sure they are up-to-date and complete. That's the general idea. That also means that we can focus these pages more clearly - are there things in 1 that should be in 2, for example? Is 2 linking to all the resources 1 is? (eg PyPackager)? Cheers, Dave. -- maemo.org docsmaster Email: dne...@maemo.org Jabber: bo...@jabber.org ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Tue, 9 Feb 2010, Jeremiah Foster wrote: Exactly. Thanks for pointing this out Marius. Unless I am mistaken Ajai, you were referring to building multiple *package* binaries, correct? (Not multiple application/runtime binaries.) Just to clarify with an example: when installing say, ruby, there is a main binary but also additional binaries in the package (irb, etc) - those should all be in the same package. Things like MySQL or openssh have separate client and server tool so those should be separate package. Am I correct? -- Aj. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Feb 10, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Ajai Khattri wrote: On Tue, 9 Feb 2010, Jeremiah Foster wrote: Exactly. Thanks for pointing this out Marius. Unless I am mistaken Ajai, you were referring to building multiple *package* binaries, correct? (Not multiple application/runtime binaries.) Just to clarify with an example: when installing say, ruby, there is a main binary but also additional binaries in the package (irb, etc) - those should all be in the same package. Things like MySQL or openssh have separate client and server tool so those should be separate package. Yes, I think these are good examples. I am going to agree completely with Graham's previous email: quote If the programs are grouped together such that if the user installs one they almost certainly also want another then they should go into the same binary package (this often occurs with programs and scripts which make use of them or set them up, for example). On the other hand, if it is likely that the user may want one program without another, then they should go into different binary packages so that space is not wasted (and possible user confusion caused) by having both installed when you only want one. A good example of that is openssh-server and openssh-client: in many cases you need one or the other, not both, so they are two different binary packages built from the same source package (openssh). /quote Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Tue, 9 Feb 2010, Dave Neary wrote: Which docs were you following, and how did you get there? we're trying to make http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging the standard quick start page, and http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Packaging%2C_Deploying_and_Distributing FYI, the URL above is what I was reading. -- Aj. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
Hi, Ajai Khattri wrote: That depends, but for the current situation, I would say no. Firstly, creating multiple binary packages is harder than a single binary, though not by much. I recommend you start out with just a single binary if you can. OK, but Im curious: what would be an example of a package with multiple binaries? binutils, for example? gcc has a few (c89 c99 versions, for example) textutils openssh (scp, sftp, ssh, ...) 2) I got an error saying it could not find package.orig.tar.gz - what does that mean? This means you do not have an original tarball of your package that has the suffix orig.tar.gz. Take a look at the debian documentation here which should help: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html#s-dh_make So, to clarify, I need to have a tarball of the original source inside the untarred tarball build directory? :-) Have a look at this page: http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging#A_concrete_example_-_rot13 dh_make takes a -f argument that points to the original .tar.gz, and generates rot13_0.1.orig.tar.gz, rot13_0.1-1.diff.gz, rot13_0.1-1.dsc and rot13_0.1-1_i386.changes afterwards. I was following the Maemo docs which dont mention anything about licenses. Maybe there ought to be a link to the dh_make man page from there? Which docs were you following, and how did you get there? we're trying to make http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging the standard quick start page, and http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Packaging%2C_Deploying_and_Distributing and http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ the definitive more than you ever needed or wanted to know about Debian packaging, but were too afraid to ignore pages. Cheers, Dave. -- maemo.org docsmaster Email: dne...@maemo.org Jabber: bo...@jabber.org ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On 09/02/10 08:29, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Ajai Khattri wrote: That depends, but for the current situation, I would say no. Firstly, creating multiple binary packages is harder than a single binary, though not by much. I recommend you start out with just a single binary if you can. OK, but Im curious: what would be an example of a package with multiple binaries? binutils, for example? gcc has a few (c89 c99 versions, for example) textutils openssh (scp, sftp, ssh, ...) git, imagemagick, mysql, ... 2) I got an error saying it could not find package.orig.tar.gz - what does that mean? This means you do not have an original tarball of your package that has the suffix orig.tar.gz. Take a look at the debian documentation here which should help: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html#s-dh_make So, to clarify, I need to have a tarball of the original source inside the untarred tarball build directory? :-) Have a look at this page: http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging#A_concrete_example_-_rot13 dh_make takes a -f argument that points to the original .tar.gz, and generates rot13_0.1.orig.tar.gz, rot13_0.1-1.diff.gz, rot13_0.1-1.dsc and rot13_0.1-1_i386.changes afterwards. I was following the Maemo docs which dont mention anything about licenses. Maybe there ought to be a link to the dh_make man page from there? Which docs were you following, and how did you get there? we're trying to make http://wiki.maemo.org/Packaging the standard quick start page, and http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Packaging%2C_Deploying_and_Distributing and http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ the definitive more than you ever needed or wanted to know about Debian packaging, but were too afraid to ignore pages. Cheers, Dave. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 12:19:10AM -0500, Ajai Khattri wrote: Im trying to create my first Maemo package and I had a few questions: 1) This package has a main binary, but also has additional binaries/scripts and library files, so do I select 'Multiple binaries' when running dh_make ? There's some confusion here that I haven't seen addressed in this thread: binary can mean a binary execution file, which is what you're thinking about, or it can mean a binary Debian package, which is what dh_make is asking about. You most likely want a single binary deb that contains all your executables. Marius Gedminas -- ...Unix, MS-DOS, and Windows NT (also known as the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly). -- Matt Welsh signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Feb 9, 2010, at 16:23, Marius Gedminas wrote: On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 12:19:10AM -0500, Ajai Khattri wrote: Im trying to create my first Maemo package and I had a few questions: 1) This package has a main binary, but also has additional binaries/scripts and library files, so do I select 'Multiple binaries' when running dh_make ? There's some confusion here that I haven't seen addressed in this thread: binary can mean a binary execution file, which is what you're thinking about, or it can mean a binary Debian package, which is what dh_make is asking about. You most likely want a single binary deb that contains all your executables. Exactly. Thanks for pointing this out Marius. Unless I am mistaken Ajai, you were referring to building multiple *package* binaries, correct? (Not multiple application/runtime binaries.) Jeremiah ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Tuesday 09 February 2010 14:29:14 Bernd Stramm wrote: On 09/02/10 08:29, Dave Neary wrote: Hi, Ajai Khattri wrote: OK, but Im curious: what would be an example of a package with multiple binaries? binutils, for example? gcc has a few (c89 c99 versions, for example) textutils openssh (scp, sftp, ssh, ...) git, imagemagick, mysql, ... I think of it like this: A single source package may generate multiple programs (normally related in some way). If the programs are grouped together such that if the user installs one they almost certainly also want another then they should go into the same binary package (this often occurs with programs and scripts which make use of them or set them up, for example). On the other hand, if it is likely that the user may want one program without another, then they should go into different binary packages so that space is not wasted (and possible user confusion caused) by having both installed when you only want one. A good example of that is openssh-server and openssh-client: in many cases you need one or the other, not both, so they are two different binary packages built from the same source package (openssh). Graham ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
Hi Ajai! On Feb 8, 2010, at 6:19 AM, Ajai Khattri wrote: Im trying to create my first Maemo package Awesome! :) and I had a few questions: 1) This package has a main binary, but also has additional binaries/scripts and library files, so do I select 'Multiple binaries' when running dh_make ? That depends, but for the current situation, I would say no. Firstly, creating multiple binary packages is harder than a single binary, though not by much. I recommend you start out with just a single binary if you can. 2) I got an error saying it could not find package.orig.tar.gz - what does that mean? This means you do not have an original tarball of your package that has the suffix orig.tar.gz. Take a look at the debian documentation here which should help: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html#s-dh_make 3) The summary dh_make printed said the license was 'blank' ? You have to specify the license the software is under yourself. From the man page for dh_make: OPTIONS -c, --copyright license Use license type in copyright file. license can be gpl, lgpl, artistic or bsd. If this field is not specified the copyright file has a space to fill in which sort of license is used. The field is case-insensitive so -c GPL works as well as -c gpl. You may want to review this document: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ -- Aj. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, Jeremiah Foster wrote: Im trying to create my first Maemo package Awesome! :) Yes, Maemo needs more developers and more software! :-) That depends, but for the current situation, I would say no. Firstly, creating multiple binary packages is harder than a single binary, though not by much. I recommend you start out with just a single binary if you can. OK, but Im curious: what would be an example of a package with multiple binaries? 2) I got an error saying it could not find package.orig.tar.gz - what does that mean? This means you do not have an original tarball of your package that has the suffix orig.tar.gz. Take a look at the debian documentation here which should help: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html#s-dh_make So, to clarify, I need to have a tarball of the original source inside the untarred tarball build directory? :-) You have to specify the license the software is under yourself. From the man page for dh_make: OPTIONS -c, --copyright license Use license type in copyright file. license can be gpl, lgpl, artistic or bsd. If this field is not specified the copyright file has a space to fill in which sort of license is used. The field is case-insensitive so -c GPL works as well as -c gpl. I was following the Maemo docs which dont mention anything about licenses. Maybe there ought to be a link to the dh_make man page from there? You may want to review this document: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ Thanks for this and the other links. -- Aj. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Re: Packaging questions
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, Jeremiah Foster wrote: This means you do not have an original tarball of your package that has the suffix orig.tar.gz. Take a look at the debian documentation here which should help: http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-first.en.html#s-dh_make Hmmm.. the docs says: After this execution of dh_make, a copy of the upstream tarball is created as gentoo_0.9.12.orig.tar.gz in the parent directory to accommodate the creation of the non-native Debian source package with the diff.gz. Which seems to imply that dh_make creates the orig tarball... UPDATE: I used the -f flag to point to the original tarball outside the build directory and it seems to have worked. -- Aj. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
Packaging questions
Im trying to create my first Maemo package and I had a few questions: 1) This package has a main binary, but also has additional binaries/scripts and library files, so do I select 'Multiple binaries' when running dh_make ? 2) I got an error saying it could not find package.orig.tar.gz - what does that mean? 3) The summary dh_make printed said the license was 'blank' ? -- Aj. ___ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
