fdpm-develop

[Fdpm-develop] updated proposed fdp version 0.2.0 spec

[Kenneth J. D. <je...@co...>]

Attached is version 1.1.1 of proposed FDP v0.2.0 specification.
It contains the full FDP 0.2.0 file format that I intend to
support.  I still need to update FDPM (libraries & program) with
several of the added features, which hopefully I will get to
do this weekend.  Feel free to ask any questions, comments, or
point out items that may still need adjusting.

The main additions are the support for dependency information,
and eased the implementation of extracting random files from
the package.

Jeremy Davis
je...@co...

Re:[Fdpm-develop] RFC: fdp version 0.2.0 spec

[Kenneth J. D. <je...@co...>]

From: Aitor Santamaria Merino <ait...@wa...>
>My first naive approach would be something like adding a list of
>packages that are required, and a minimum version. If the version field
>is standarized (e.g. BYTE.BYTE.BYTE), then one can define version
>comparing routines, so that one could also include list of dependencies:
> 
>[Dependencies]
>ThisPackage=1.0.0
>AnotherOne=4.1.2
> 
>This way, if AnotherPackage ver. 4.1.7 is already installed, then the
>checking will succeed, and if ThisPackage doesn't exist, or version is
>previous to 1.0.0, then it should be asked this package to be installed.

I will update FDP version 0.2.0 to include dependency support, and update
the libraries to at least handle the dependency data (ie ignore it).
Later I (or someone else) can add the logic to take advantage of the
included dependency information.  
I don't intend to increase the FDP version # as the previous message
was only sent to this list, and it indicates that was the proposed version.

Basically this is what FDP 0.2.0 will look like:
 information/fdp version header
 current general package header BYTE name[] .. DWORD count
 DWORD dependcnt   /* how many packages we are dependant on */
 0 or more dependency records, dependcnt specifies how many
 0 or more file records, count specifies how many

Dependency Record
WORD[3] minversion   (the minimal major.minor.patch version of 
                      package that we need installed prior to this one)
WORD[3] maxversion   (usually zeroed or FFFFh.FFFFh.FFFFh, contains the
                      highest version of a package that will work and that
                      we need installed prior to this one - this
                      is used only if you know in advance (package
                      creation time) that a given version and above
                      breaks compatibility that is needed with this package.
BYTE[ML_NAME] pkgname The name of the package that this package is
                      dependent on, pkgname should be '\0' padded and
                      in the same form as the package name used in the
                      general package header.


Jeremy Davis
je...@co...

[Fdpm-develop] RFC: fdp version 0.2.0 spec

[Kenneth J. D. <je...@co...>]

Attached is my current proposal for FDP 0.2.0,
which is implemented, though I need to do some more
testing (and ensuring it still compiles with DJGPP)
before publicly releasing.  If anyone has any
objections or suggestions, please send them to me,
and I'll try to incorporate them before releasing
my work (if anyone wants it in its current state,
just send me a note & I'll send it to you).

Thanks,
Jeremy Davis
je...@co...

[Fdpm-develop] Some changes to FDPM

[Kenneth J. D. <Per...@at...>]

Hello all,

I am working on changing FreeDOS install program to use FDPM instead of unzip.
A few tidbits of information where not included in the FDP 0.1.0 spec, so I
updated FDP to 0.2.0 and added them (things like license & maintainer) and
have updated FDPM to 0.9.0 so it uses these changes and a few other changes
so it handles some functionality I wanted.  The actual FDPM.EXE program should
behave the same as before, except it uses v0.2.0 FDP packages and the PATH
specified to create/open the db is now assumed to be a directory, that is,
if it does not end in / or \ then one is appended.  I still need to update
the build library so it understands the added entries.  A stub version of
uninstall is in place (it just returns error), but after I get the initial
working release of install using FDPM lib, I plan to finish it (as it is
needed to properly support upgrading a preexisting install).  If anyone
is still following this list, please let me know!  After I get the above
stuff done I'll figure out who I need to send the files to, but in the
meantime, if anyone wants my work in progress just send me a note. 
I updated the DB library to have function prototypes, fix 1 = versus ==
bug, and a few function calls missing a 3rd (but unused) size parameter
(I think the original compilers will still work - assuming they support
function prototypes, but I have only currently tested my changes with
Borland C/C++ v3 - which happily compiles without errors or warnings
(in default mode) and runs all the tests fine). I also updated it to
compile the DB library in large mode since FDPM & Install are both compiled
in large model.

Jeremy Davis
je...@co...

[Fdpm-develop] My incoming present!

[Aitor S. M. <ait...@te...>]

Hi all,

This is my first message to this mailing list. I would like to
contribute to this project with the following (sorry, Jim, for
duplicity):

1) The catalog file in Spanish (from Spain), encoded with the usual 850
codepage.

2) Jointly with the author, version, distr. etc, I would add the
following field:
language=
and I will explain why (perhaps you don't have this experience with
international versions of Windows): at times, if I install a newer
version of a program, I get a dialog saying this:

'Warning: You are about to install:
    THISCOMPONENT, v.5.0 (English language)
Whereas you have the following:
    THISCOMPONENT, v.4.0 (Spanish language)
Do you wish to continue?'

So when you are installing a new package, perhaps the inexperienced
users would prefer not to upgrade. At times you can have a very strange
mixture of languages (a friend of mine had his IE as a mixture of
Spanish and German, just because he upgraded with a German version of
his modem driver). So at times, lang can be almost as important as
version (for non-experienced users, of course).

3) In order to enable front-ends to be built-up over FDPM, I would
suggest that not only messages to screen, but also the possible
errorcode to be encoded within the DOS exit code (ERRORLEVEL). I am
thinking (or dreaming) of, say, 'FDPackager for Seal'...

Also, I would like to know about the status of the Query options of
FDPM. So how can I know the version of an already installed package? Can
this be done without parsing FDPM output? What about the bug mentioned
about this? what's that?

Thanks!

Aitor

[Fdpm-develop] ANNOUNCE: FDPM alpha release.

[Andy P. <and...@ad...>]

I've released FDPM 0.7.0 alpha today.

Changes:
- reorganized the source directory structure.
- added the FDPM documents to the distribution.
- implemented some action command line parameters
like: --help, --version,...
- added installation support for the packages.

To do:
- database support.
- support for removing the packages.

Note: before you want to compile the sources, read the file INSTALL in the
docs directory first. It contains very important information.

Andy.

[Fdpm-develop] ANNOUNCE: FDPM 0.7.0 pre-alpha available.

[Andy P. <and...@ad...>]

Hi all,

Today, I released the pre-alpha version of FDPM. For the moment it only
supports:
- building packages,
- querying packages.

This release contains a makefile for DJGPP and pre-compiled libraries
(DJGPP) are also included.
Download the sources of the FDPM website.

The next (alpha) release will contains support for installing the packages.

Andy.