Thread: [pure-lang-users] Debian (and Gentoo?) distribution
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
agraef
Menu
▾
▴
pure-lang-users
|
From: David B. <dh...@gm...> - 2008-08-16 04:27:02
|
Hi, It doesn't seem that anyone has yet taken up an effort to get Pure or Q into the official Debian package lists. So, unless someone else has a special interest, I was thinking of volunteering to be a package maintainer and seek out a sponsor [1] to get the packages into Debian (and hopefully propagate into Ubuntu too...?). I also might look into getting this into Gentoo Portage too. The other major distro is Fedora, which I am not too keen on (Can't just untar a stage2 and go? Can't just run debootstrap? You mean I have to install from a CD?!?!? And why don't the scripts make any sense? :-P). This would probably be the most responsible thing I've done in my life, so I'm a little nervous about the commitment. But can it really be _that_ bad? Would this effort be encouraged, or is someone else already planning to tackle this? -David [1] http://people.debian.org/~mpalmer/debian-mentors_FAQ.html |
|
From: Albert G. <Dr....@t-...> - 2008-08-16 10:29:03
|
David Baird wrote: > It doesn't seem that anyone has yet taken up an effort to get Pure or > Q into the official Debian package lists. So, unless someone else has > a special interest, I was thinking of volunteering to be a package > maintainer and seek out a sponsor [1] to get the packages into Debian > (and hopefully propagate into Ubuntu too...?). That would be much appreciated! (You'd probably need to get the LLVM debs updated, too, IIRC they're quite old.) > I also might look into getting this into Gentoo Portage too. Alvaro Castro Castilla has already done a Gentoo ebuild of LLVM and Pure, see this thread here: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_name=487DAE08.2070804%40t-online.de > The other major distro is Fedora, which I am not too keen on Fedora is RPM-based, so one could probably take Toni Graffy's comprehensive openSUSE packages (see the Q and Pure websites for pointers) and try to massage them so that they build on Fedora. However, there already are Q packages for Fedora by Gerard Milmeister, again see the Q website for pointers. Maybe one could convince Gerard to do packages for Pure as well. Anyone running Fedora here? > Would this effort be encouraged, Certainly! If you run into any problems, just post to the mailing list and we'll sort them out. Cheers, Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu... WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag |
|
From: David B. <dh...@gm...> - 2008-08-24 21:52:59
|
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Albert Graef <Dr....@t-...> wrote: > Albert Graef wrote: >> David Baird wrote: >>> It doesn't seem that anyone has yet taken up an effort to get Pure or >>> Q into the official Debian package lists. So, unless someone else has >>> a special interest, I was thinking of volunteering to be a package >>> maintainer and seek out a sponsor [1] to get the packages into Debian >>> (and hopefully propagate into Ubuntu too...?). >> >> That would be much appreciated! (You'd probably need to get the LLVM >> debs updated, too, IIRC they're quite old.) > > Did anything come out of this so far? Sorry to be so insistent, but now > that with Pure 0.5 a reasonably bug-free and complete implementation is > out, it would *really* be nice if someone would tackle the Debian > packages. If David cannot do it, is there someone else here proficient > enough with the Debian packaging system to pull it off? I cannot do it > myself, since I don't run Debian. I am still planning to work on it, but if someone else wants to take it up, then that would be great too. No problem about being insistent. Coaxing usually does for good to me than bad. My current status is that I have got a Debian chroot up and running (I need a chroot since I usually am running on Ubuntu and sometimes Gentoo). I think the next step (that I haven't done yet) is to start mapping out the dependences, writing the Debian control files, and get the build process figured out. Then the next step after that is to find a sponsor within Debian who will incorporate the package into Debian. I'm also not yet certain if I will run into complexities with LLVM (like, having to create a custom package for LLVM just to be compatible with Pure). Hopefully not *crosses fingers*. -David |
|
From: David B. <dh...@gm...> - 2008-08-28 05:45:43
|
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 10:05 AM, David Baird <dh...@gm...> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Albert Graef <Dr....@t-...> wrote:
>> If you have any additional questions about the build process just ask.
>
> Surely. Sorry this is taking me some time - there are a few other
> things I am juggling right now. I'm going to set a goal to have some
> packages (source and x86) ready by this coming weekend.
Okay, I am working out the debian files now. I have a question for
the debian/copyright template:
Upstream Author(s):
<put author's name and email here>
<likewise for another author>
Copyright:
<Copyright (C) YYYY Name OfAuthor>
<likewise for another author>
How would you like these filled out? My default thought is this:
Upstream Author(s):
Albert Gräf <Dr.Graef at t-online.de>
Copyright:
Copyright (C) 2008 Albert Gräf
-David
|
|
From: Albert G. <Dr....@t-...> - 2008-08-28 12:11:11
|
David Baird wrote: > How would you like these filled out? My default thought is this: I'm fine with your suggestion. It's also ok if you s/ä/ae/, I often do that myself when it might be better to stick to 7 bit ASCII. ;-) Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu... WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag |
|
From: David B. <dh...@gm...> - 2008-08-28 06:37:40
|
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 10:05 AM, David Baird <dh...@gm...> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Albert Graef <Dr....@t-...> wrote:
>> If you have any additional questions about the build process just ask.
>
> Surely. Sorry this is taking me some time - there are a few other
> things I am juggling right now. I'm going to set a goal to have some
> packages (source and x86) ready by this coming weekend.
Okay, a quick update. I have figured out most of the details of
packaging Pure 0.5. I haven't contacted the Debian lists yet. My
plan was to do a request-for-sponsor on the debian-mentors list as
soon as I can resolve the errors from Lintian.
Debian experimental has LLVM 2.3 whereas Debian unstable has only LLVM
2.2. AFAICT, Pure 0.5 wants LLVM 2.3. I guess that means Pure 0.5
will also have to be in experimental along with LLVM 2.3...?
Lintian (Debian's sanity checking/validation program) is printing some
errors that I'll have to deal with. I'll look at this more later
(about to fall asleep now), but here are the messages just in case
anyone is curious:
Now running lintian...
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/cron.d.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/pure.default.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/init.d.lsb.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/preinst.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/pure.doc-base.EX
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/manpage.sgml.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/postinst.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/manpage.1.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/postrm.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/prerm.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/emacsen-remove.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/menu.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/watch.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/emacsen-startup.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/emacsen-install.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/manpage.xml.ex
W: pure source: dh-make-template-in-source debian/init.d.ex
W: pure source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.7.3 (current is 3.8.0)
E: pure: manpage-not-compressed usr/share/man/man1/pure.1
W: pure: package-contains-empty-directory usr/sbin/
W: pure: readme-debian-contains-debmake-template
E: pure: sharedobject-in-library-directory-missing-soname
usr/lib/libpure-0.5.so
E: pure: copyright-file-contains-full-gpl-license
W: pure: copyright-lists-upstream-authors-with-dh_make-boilerplate
W: pure: new-package-should-close-itp-bug
W: pure: wrong-bug-number-in-closes l3:#nnnn
Finished running lintian.
I'll be happy to resolve these errors, as soon as I can figure out
what some of them actually mean :-)
-David
|
|
From: Albert G. <Dr....@t-...> - 2008-08-28 17:43:31
|
David Baird wrote: > Okay, a quick update. I have figured out most of the details of > packaging Pure 0.5. Good news! > My plan was to do a request-for-sponsor on the debian-mentors list as > soon as I can resolve the errors from Lintian. Good luck with that. The Debian bureaucracy grinding makes the Catholic church look like a modern enterprise. ;-) So if that doesn't pan out so well, we'll just release your package on pure-lang.sf.net instead. It doesn't really matter how prospective Pure programmers get their Debian package as long as they can get it! But of course it would be nice to get it into the official distro as well. > Debian experimental has LLVM 2.3 whereas Debian unstable has only LLVM > 2.2. AFAICT, Pure 0.5 wants LLVM 2.3. I guess that means Pure 0.5 > will also have to be in experimental along with LLVM 2.3...? Yes. LLVM 2.2 is no go with Pure >= 0.5, unless someone wants to backport it to LLVM 2.2. (That shouldn't be difficult, though, the most annoying incompatibilities are in the IR Builder class. But the 2.2 JIT is awful, that's the main reason why I don't support 2.2 any more.) > E: pure: manpage-not-compressed usr/share/man/man1/pure.1 You're probably supposed to gzip the manpage, same on other distros. > E: pure: sharedobject-in-library-directory-missing-soname > usr/lib/libpure-0.5.so Debian has other packages containing libraries which don't follow the usual so.x.y.z versioning, so it must be possible to work around this. Or maybe you need to release the .so in a separate "library" package? That's how it works, e.g., on SUSE (see Toni Graffy's Pure packages on Packman). > E: pure: copyright-file-contains-full-gpl-license That sounds like it just wants a short copyright notice in that file. But what do I know? > Finished running lintian. Those package sanity checkers really go overboard sometimes. Guess that the bureaucratic types found their playground on Linux at last. A big thank you for your work on this! :) Cheers, Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu... WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag |
|
From: Albert G. <Dr....@t-...> - 2008-08-24 21:38:26
|
Albert Graef wrote: > David Baird wrote: >> It doesn't seem that anyone has yet taken up an effort to get Pure or >> Q into the official Debian package lists. So, unless someone else has >> a special interest, I was thinking of volunteering to be a package >> maintainer and seek out a sponsor [1] to get the packages into Debian >> (and hopefully propagate into Ubuntu too...?). > > That would be much appreciated! (You'd probably need to get the LLVM > debs updated, too, IIRC they're quite old.) Did anything come out of this so far? Sorry to be so insistent, but now that with Pure 0.5 a reasonably bug-free and complete implementation is out, it would *really* be nice if someone would tackle the Debian packages. If David cannot do it, is there someone else here proficient enough with the Debian packaging system to pull it off? I cannot do it myself, since I don't run Debian. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu... WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag |
|
From: Albert G. <Dr....@t-...> - 2008-08-25 01:21:24
|
David Baird wrote: > I am still planning to work on it That would be great. As you can see nobody else has volunteered yet. :) > I'm also not yet certain if I will run into complexities with LLVM > (like, having to create a custom package for LLVM just to be > compatible with Pure). Hopefully not *crosses fingers*. Building LLVM (the core libraries at least, and that is all that's needed for Pure) and Pure itself is rather simple and well-documented in Pure's INSTALL file. Also note that in fact LLVM 2.3 is only a build requirement (those LLVM libraries that Pure links against are all static). But of course if you do a Debian source package then you need to provide packages for all build requirements, too. There's one small complication with LLVM on x86-64 bit systems only, it needs a patch there for making the LLVM libs link into libpure.so. But that's also described in Pure's INSTALL file and the patch is readily available from the Pure website. Pure you just configure as './configure --prefix=/usr --enable-release', then run make and make install, that's it. (You can use 'make install DESTDIR=/my/staging/directory' to install into a build root as usual.) There might be some smaller glitches if you compile with gcc 4.3, but they should be easy to fix. If you have any additional questions about the build process just ask. Albert -- Dr. Albert Gr"af Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany Email: Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu... WWW: http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag |
|
From: David B. <dh...@gm...> - 2008-08-25 16:05:01
|
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Albert Graef <Dr....@t-...> wrote: > If you have any additional questions about the build process just ask. Surely. Sorry this is taking me some time - there are a few other things I am juggling right now. I'm going to set a goal to have some packages (source and x86) ready by this coming weekend. |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X