2009/12/2 Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org:
All files installed under e.g. /usr/lib/python2.5 go automatically
to /opt. But note that the package itself is unchanged (because
pymaemo-optify takes care of handling these mount binds), so there is
no way for maemo-optify to know
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:
2009/12/2 Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org:
All files installed under e.g. /usr/lib/python2.5 go automatically
to /opt. But note that the package itself is unchanged (because
pymaemo-optify takes care of
2009/11/9 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
When autobuilder expected to start to optify packages without
debian/optify in them?
I don't know. We certainly need to tune the heuristic of maemo-optify
first to handle Python.
As far as I see Python is optified now. When we should do
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/11/9 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
When autobuilder expected to start to optify packages without
debian/optify in them?
I don't know. We certainly need to tune the heuristic of maemo-optify
first to handle
2009/12/2 Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:02 AM, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/11/9 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
When autobuilder expected to start to optify packages without
debian/optify in them?
I don't know. We certainly
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/12/2 Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org:
If you have plans to begin enabling auto-optification by default,
please inform us here on the list so we can begin adding the
debian/optify file to avoid optifying
ext Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org writes:
If you have plans to begin enabling auto-optification by default,
please inform us here on the list so we can begin adding the
debian/optify file to avoid optifying packages that were manually
optified by other means (e.g. python
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Marius Vollmer
marius.voll...@nokia.com wrote:
ext Anderson Lizardo anderson.liza...@openbossa.org writes:
If you have plans to begin enabling auto-optification by default,
please inform us here on the list so we can begin adding the
debian/optify file to
-optify to not run.
Nathan Anderson
-Original Message-
From: maemo-developers-boun...@maemo.org
[mailto:maemo-developers-boun...@maemo.org] On Behalf Of Anderson Lizardo
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 11:56 AM
To: Marius Vollmer
Cc: maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: maemo-optify
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Nathan Anderson
nat...@andersonsplace.net wrote:
Anderson Lizardo,
Unless I misunderstood; if the package itself has a /opt path in it
the maemo-optify won't run on it. So if you are installing anything
(even one file) under the /opt path (which
2009/11/9 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
When autobuilder expected to start to optify packages without
debian/optify in them?
I don't know. We certainly need to tune the heuristic of maemo-optify
first to handle Python.
Just in case you need my help. I'm here for this week. My 2
2009/11/6 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
I've discussed this with sbdmock author and we decided to make small
change to sbdmock: New configurable action will be introduced. This
action will be executed by sbdmock between unpacking rootstrap
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Maemo-optify can be invoked in a number of ways. I'll explain what
happens when the modified dpkg-buildpackage calls
maemo-optify-deb --auto
Which is how it's used in modified dpkg-buildpackage, right?
Correct.
after running ./debian/rules
On Tuesday 03 November 2009 23:40:24 Graham Cobb wrote:
debugging, I need to be able to control exactly which versions of various
libraries are being used for that particular build including, sometimes,
old versions. And I often have different targets with different library
versions
On Nov 4, 2009, at 13:04, Attila Csipa wrote:
On Tuesday 03 November 2009 23:40:24 Graham Cobb wrote:
debugging, I need to be able to control exactly which versions of
various
libraries are being used for that particular build including,
sometimes,
old versions. And I often have
Hi,
2009/11/2 Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
[ Jussi, we would like to get a new debian-etch devkit for Maemo 5 with
the attached patch. Please advise how to best go about this.
]
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
I can also help
I did start a project to do that but i never gotr very far with it. But we
really don't need it now -- sbdmock serves that need and has the advantage that
it is the tool the autobuilder uses so you can use it to make sure you will
build in the autolbuilder.
But I wasn't referring to real
ext Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net writes:
I don't object to the autobuilder running apt-get upgrade but I would
object very strongly if dpkg-buildpackage were to do an upgrade!
[...]
I am not sure anyone was proposing that dpkg-buildpackage would do an
upgrade but wanted to point out that
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Has anybody tried this devkit? Does it work as expected?
I tried it by building (slightly modified versions of) xournal, hermes,
and libliqbase, and everything went as expected.
The slight modification was echo auto debian/optify to turn on
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
I didn't manage to get the devkit to compile (I didn't see a way to get
it to not install into / during build), but I have a patch anyway
(attached).
You can learn how to do it here:
http://scratchbox.org/documentation/docbook/devkit.html
Yeah, it
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
Luckily, with apt-get upgrade being run during build, we don't need
to change dpkg-checkbuilddeps and we can just update build-essential.
(Unless I am missing something. Do I?)
rootstrap is used as
2009/11/4 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Has anybody tried this devkit? Does it work as expected?
I tried it by building (slightly modified versions of) xournal, hermes,
and libliqbase, and everything went as expected.
Can you elaborate a
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 17:52, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/11/4 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Has anybody tried this devkit? Does it work as expected?
I tried it by building (slightly modified versions of) xournal, hermes,
and
2009/11/4 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
Luckily, with apt-get upgrade being run during build, we don't need
to change dpkg-checkbuilddeps and we can just update build-essential.
(Unless I
From: ext Ed Bartosh [bart...@gmail.com]
2009/11/4 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Has anybody tried this devkit? Does it work as expected?
I tried it by building (slightly modified versions of) xournal, hermes,
and libliqbase, and everything
2009/11/3 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
On Monday 02 November 2009 12:16:57 Ed Bartosh wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
The buildbot would need to run apt-get install maemo-optify at the
right time. Any idea of how to do that?
Right way to do it is to include it
ext Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net writes:
On Monday 02 November 2009 12:16:57 Ed Bartosh wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
The buildbot would need to run apt-get install maemo-optify at the
right time. Any idea of how to do that?
Right way to do it is to include
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net writes:
On Monday 02 November 2009 12:16:57 Ed Bartosh wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
The buildbot would need to run apt-get install maemo-optify at the
right time. Any idea of
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
We can hack dpkg-checkbuilddeps to unconditionally add maemo-optify to
the list of build dependencies.
Ouch. That's very desperate.
What about changing dpkg-buildpackage to run apt-get install
maemo-optify if necessary? That concentrates the hacks in
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
We can hack dpkg-checkbuilddeps to unconditionally add maemo-optify to
the list of build dependencies.
Ouch. That's very desperate.
May be. But not as desperate as calling apt-get install from
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
We can hack dpkg-checkbuilddeps to unconditionally add maemo-optify to
the list of build dependencies.
Ouch. That's very desperate.
May be. But not as
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
2009/11/3 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
We can hack dpkg-checkbuilddeps to unconditionally add maemo-optify to
the list of build dependencies.
Dammit, why won't modest do proper quoting...
Marius (I think) wrote...
ext Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net writes:
On Monday 02 November 2009 12:16:57 Ed Bartosh wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
The buildbot would need to run apt-get install maemo-optify at the
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
So, I can see this way of implementing this:
- give optification scripts to SDK developers and ask them to prepare
Debian devkit for Fremantle with patched dpkg-buildpackage as fast as
possible.
Ed wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
Would maemo-optify be part of that devkit as well, or would it be in the
rootstrap?
I prefer to leave maemo-optify in the rootstrap: that way, we can update
it much easier, which is quite important at this stage.
2009/11/2 Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org:
Ed wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
Would maemo-optify be part of that devkit as well, or would it be in the
rootstrap?
I prefer to leave maemo-optify in the rootstrap: that way, we can update
it much easier, which is
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
OK, we can make dependency from dpkb-buildpackage to maemo-optify not
so strict. If maemo-optify is present it will be called from
dpkg-buildpackage. With this approach we can put maemo-optify into
rootstrap.
Ok, I'll make it like that, then.
BTW,
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
OK, we can make dependency from dpkb-buildpackage to maemo-optify not
so strict. If maemo-optify is present it will be called from
dpkg-buildpackage. With this approach we can put maemo-optify into
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Right way to do it is to include it into SDK rootstrap. Other ways I
can think of look hackish.
(I think this is a good example of what is wrong with Maemo: normally,
we would just upload a patched dpkg and be done with it. Now we have to
muck around
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Right way to do it is to include it into SDK rootstrap. Other ways I
can think of look hackish.
(I think this is a good example of what is wrong with Maemo: normally,
we would just upload a patched
ext Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net writes:
On Thursday 29 October 2009 11:12:45 Marius Vollmer wrote:
ext Alberto Mardegan ma...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
b) A control file field makes the most sense to
control the build process.
Agreed.
I think dedicated files in debian/
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net writes:
On Thursday 29 October 2009 11:12:45 Marius Vollmer wrote:
ext Alberto Mardegan ma...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
b) A control file field makes the most sense to
control the build process.
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
Please, use dpkg-buildpackage from the current devkit:
http://scratchbox.org/download/files/sbox-releases/stable/src/scratchbox-devkit-debian-1.0.10.tar.gz
Thjanks for the pointer. I guess I need a special 'host' Scratchbox
target to build this sucker,
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
That's the plan so far. autobuilder calls dpkg-buildpackage without
checkiing anything, like it already does.
Yes, and the modified dpkg-buildpackage would always call
maemo-optify-deb --auto without checking anything (except whether
maemo-optify-deb
[ Jussi, we would like to get a new debian-etch devkit for Maemo 5 with
the attached patch. Please advise how to best go about this.
]
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
I can also help with building devkit if needed.
I didn't manage to get the devkit to compile (I didn't see a way to
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
[ Jussi, we would like to get a new debian-etch devkit for Maemo 5 with
the attached patch. Please advise how to best go about this.
]
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
I can also help with building devkit if needed.
I didn't
On Monday 02 November 2009 12:16:57 Ed Bartosh wrote:
2009/11/2 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
The buildbot would need to run apt-get install maemo-optify at the
right time. Any idea of how to do that?
Right way to do it is to include it into SDK rootstrap. Other ways I
can
2009/10/29 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
On Wednesday 28 October 2009 22:50:25 Ed Bartosh wrote:
Somehow I don't like the idea of doing anything with the package
without developer being aware of this. I'd rather implement check on
autobuilder side to insure that packages are optified.
On Sunday 01 November 2009 09:02:34 Ed Bartosh wrote:
So, what should we do?
My proposal is to make dpkg-buildpackage to call maemo-optify. With
this we can solve 2 problems - autobuilder will optify packages and
developers will have their packages automatically optified for their
local
2009/11/1 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
On Sunday 01 November 2009 09:02:34 Ed Bartosh wrote:
So, what should we do?
My proposal is to make dpkg-buildpackage to call maemo-optify. With
this we can solve 2 problems - autobuilder will optify packages and
developers will have their packages
On Nov 1, 2009, at 18:17, Ed Bartosh wrote:
2009/11/1 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
On Sunday 01 November 2009 09:02:34 Ed Bartosh wrote:
So, what should we do?
My proposal is to make dpkg-buildpackage to call maemo-optify. With
this we can solve 2 problems - autobuilder will optify
ext Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com writes:
So, I can see this way of implementing this:
- give optification scripts to SDK developers and ask them to prepare
Debian devkit for Fremantle with patched dpkg-buildpackage as fast as
possible.
We should prepare a concrete patch against
2009/10/29 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
On Wednesday 28 October 2009 22:50:25 Ed Bartosh wrote:
Somehow I don't like the idea of doing anything with the package
without developer being aware of this. I'd rather implement check on
autobuilder side to insure that packages are optified.
Graham Cobb wrote:
So, the consensus decision was that the solution would be that autobuilder
should automatically optify by default.
Sounds wrong to me. I agree with Ed, the default should be manual: so, non
optified packages would fail to build, but fixing that would be as easy as
adding a
Ed wrote:
2009/10/29 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
Nobody likes doing something to the package automatically but, after a long
discussion at the BOF, we agreed that the alternatives were even worse [1].
Then let's find the way to do it better.
What I'm afraid of is that developers
On Thursday 29 October 2009 07:07:14 Ed Bartosh wrote:
Then let's find the way to do it better.
I believe that was the stance on the problem since day 1 :)
What I'm afraid of is that developers wouldn't like the approach to
change packages implicitly.
Herein lies the root of the problem.
Alberto wrote:
Graham Cobb wrote:
So, the consensus decision was that the solution would be that autobuilder
should automatically optify by default.
Sounds wrong to me.
Can you elaborate? I'd like to be convinced (as I was during the BOF) rather
than just whomever expresses the most
ext Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org writes:
A maemo-buildpackage was mentioned in the BOF as a potential way of
allowing developers to do what the auto-builder does. How hard would
it be to develop this and get the autobuilder to call maemo- rather
than dpkg-buildpackage?
I'll give this a shot.
2009/10/29 Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org:
Ed wrote:
2009/10/29 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
Nobody likes doing something to the package automatically but, after a long
discussion at the BOF, we agreed that the alternatives were even worse [1].
Then let's find the way to do it better.
On Thursday 29 October 2009 08:08:20 Attila Csipa wrote:
On Thursday 29 October 2009 07:07:14 Ed Bartosh wrote:
Then let's find the way to do it better.
I believe that was the stance on the problem since day 1 :)
What I'm afraid of is that developers wouldn't like the approach to
change
Andrew Flegg wrote:
Alberto wrote:
Graham Cobb wrote:
So, the consensus decision was that the solution would be that autobuilder
should automatically optify by default.
Sounds wrong to me.
Can you elaborate? I'd like to be convinced (as I was during the BOF) rather
than just whomever
ext Alberto Mardegan ma...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
b) A control file field makes the most sense to
control the build process.
Agreed.
I think dedicated files in debian/ are better, like the
debian/package.install files, etc.
Right now, I am just putting the mode into
ext Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org writes:
I suggest the header is XS-Maemo-Optify, and has the following values:
none: no optification should be done, or considered, by the autobuilder.
manual: the application author will do optification manually. If the
package contains no
On Thursday 29 October 2009 11:12:45 Marius Vollmer wrote:
ext Alberto Mardegan ma...@users.sourceforge.net writes:
b) A control file field makes the most sense to
control the build process.
Agreed.
I think dedicated files in debian/ are better, like the
debian/package.install
2009/10/29 Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com:
ext Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org writes:
I suggest the header is XS-Maemo-Optify, and has the following values:
none: no optification should be done, or considered, by the autobuilder.
manual: the application author will do
2009/10/28 Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org:
Hi,
I've put together a suggested spec for the decision, taken at the
summit during the /opt BOF[1], that the auto-builder would run some
maemo-optify version during the build process (controlled by a control
file header):
Wouldn't it be better to leave the none option out considering the lack of
storage space in N900. It can be made available in Harmattan.
Regards:
Bundyo
___
maemo-developers mailing list
maemo-developers@maemo.org
Ed wrote:
I've put together a suggested spec for the decision, taken at the
summit during the /opt BOF[1], that the auto-builder would run some
maemo-optify version during the build process (controlled by a control
file header):
Sorry, I seem to miss the whole point of this activity.
Kamen wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to leave the none option out considering the lack of
storage space in N900. It can be made available in Harmattan.
The thought was that there might be a small, or niche, product which just
wouldn't work with maemo-optify and changing it to use /opt would be
I think it is good to be able to keep maemo-optify out of Build-Depends :
This way we can keep the same debian control file for Diablo and Fremantle.
I suppose the Diablo builder will only ignore the optify header ?
Fred
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:10 PM, Ed Bartosh bart...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 28 October 2009 20:39:57 Andrew Flegg wrote:
Ed wrote:
BTW, when you want to have it done?
I'm going to vacation in a couple of weeks. Before that I was going to
finish implementation of multiple packages builds if I have time.
i don't know, it's not my baby :-) One would
2009/10/28 Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org:
Ed wrote:
I've put together a suggested spec for the decision, taken at the
summit during the /opt BOF[1], that the auto-builder would run some
maemo-optify version during the build process (controlled by a control
file header):
Sorry, I seem
On Wednesday 28 October 2009 22:50:25 Ed Bartosh wrote:
Somehow I don't like the idea of doing anything with the package
without developer being aware of this. I'd rather implement check on
autobuilder side to insure that packages are optified. Developer can
use option XS-Maemo-Optify: none to
2009/10/29 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
I think we should do the second item before Ed goes on holiday, even if it
means deferring the multiple package builds. We can then test it (setting
the header to auto in various packages) while Ed is away but there is minimal
danger of problems
74 matches
Mail list logo
