Re: [Linuxcoe-devel] Update on packaging

[Bryan G. <Bry...@HP...>]

Bruno,

On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:42:07PM +0000, Cornec, Bruno (Linux Consultant) wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Bryan Gartner said on Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:01:06AM -0600:
> > Sorry for my proposal/diversion, I have recrafted the following modules to
> > use the previous namespace:
> >
> >       linuxcoe-sd-base
> >       linuxcoe-sd-docs
> 
> Oh, great ! so now my system works directly, and I do not have any
> warning/error message anymore:

Yay!

> # urpmi /usr/src/svn/LinuxCOE/build/RPMS/noarch/linuxcoe-sd-docs-devel-1.mdv2008.0.noarch.rpm /usr/src/svn/LinuxCOE/build/RPMS/noarch/linuxcoe-sd-base-devel-1.mdv2008.0.noarch.rpm
> 
> installing linuxcoe-sd-base-devel-1.mdv2008.0.noarch.rpm linuxcoe-sd-docs-devel-1.mdv2008.0.noarch.rpm from /usr/src/svn/LinuxCOE/build/RPMS/noarch
> Preparing...  #################################################################################
>       1/2: linuxcoe-sd-base #################################################################################
> Reloading httpd: [  OK  ]
>       2/2: linuxcoe-sd-docs #################################################################################
> 
> I'm already happy with that ;-)

You are almost caught up with me now ;)

> More tests tomorrow to see if it really works. (I need to configure the
> apache server now).
> 
> The remaining question I have is for the name of the directories.
> Currently by default they are named /var/log/linuxcoe-sd-base, ...
> /var/www/linuxcoe-sd-base. I wonder whether it would be cleaner to call
> those just /var/www/linuxcoe-sd (or even /var/www/linuxcoe) for more
> clarity on the admin side, and as all packages will add content below.
> May be solved later on BTW.
> 
> >       linuxcoe-sd-data-centos
> >           (and note that this module no longer delivers images)

Actually, my debian packages (which now include base+docs+Distro=FOSS
ones) all install to the same prefix which is currently
/usr/share/linuxcoe-sd/4.1 (yes I know you object to the 4.1 portion),
but the point remains the same (and that issue is still bubbling to
the top of my todo list).

And I have a vm (distinct from the vm that I build these .debs on) that
has all of these installed and working. FWIW, all of the boot images
are currently still in CVS in their original location, yet their
respecitve Makefile.am just doesn't deliver them.  One can still
obtain the images from:

	http://instalinux.com/snapshots/images

And I'll note that in the README and respective documents when this
process is complete.

> I just looked today at the fedora one to see what was needed and what
> had to be generated. If you want I can take a closer look at that based
> on the existing script for ideas, and write a perl script that creates
> what is required for LinuxCOE based on a mirrored centos setup.

What I was thinking is pretty general, basically have the user supply
the prefix to a "known" good repository, and then recursively look
to find the correct kind of files,  then do the "magic" as noted
in the images/README file.  And for extra credit, remember that the
repository does not need to reside locally, but could simply be
a well-known internet mirror ;)  With something like this, whether
you mirror, use mrepo, or just reference somebody else's repository,
you would be covered.

> > and have updated the packaging/<module>/debian artifacts to correctly
> > package them as .debs.  I will work through the remaining modules
> > this week.  After this round of modifications, I will modify:
> >
> >       linuxcoe-sd-data-*
> >           name stds, skip image delivery
> >         linuxcoe-sd-*
> >           pull back version number in delivered directory hierarchy
> >         linuxcoe-sd-*.deb
> >           migrate to .deb via PB
> 
> On that one, if you want, I can copy your current content under pbconf,
> make the adaptations, and you could then test it, once you have a
> working pb on your side ;-)

All I have yet to finish are the nonFOSS distro's.  So feel free to
give it a try with base+one other.

> I'm still not done with all my rpm VMs setup, so have not yet a .deb for pb
> itself. Will come soon I hope.

FYI, I think I have a lead on the relaxing automake1.4 dependency and
am doing some testing now.

bryang