Feature #21
Proper Debian packaging
| Status: | Closed | Start date: | 10 Mar 2010 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Due date: | ||
| Assignee: | lta | % Done: | 100% |
|
| Category: | packaging | |||
| Target version: | 0.5.0 |
Description
If you ever want to get included in the official debian or ubuntu repositories, you will need to submit debian binary AND source packages. iirc, you only submit the source packages which is then built in a chroot on one of their build server.
But CPack doesn't seems to support making debian sources packages, so you might want to have debian packaging done in a more traditionnal way.
I will try to get the time to do the debianization of dff.
I just forked your tree on github (http://github.com/elthariel/dff).
Associated revisions
Build from any directory is now possible.
~/dff-src $> mkdir build && cd build && cmake .. && make -j2
or
/tmp $> mkdir dff-build && cd dff-build && cmake ~/dff-src && make -j2
and so on.
This commit references #21 .
History
Updated by lta almost 2 years ago
- % Done changed from 10 to 20
Updated by fba almost 2 years ago
lta wrote:
If you ever want to get included in the official debian or ubuntu repositories, you will need to submit debian binary AND source packages. iirc, you only submit the source packages which is then built in a chroot on one of their build server.
But CPack doesn't seems to support making debian sources packages, so you might want to have debian packaging done in a more traditionnal way.
Currently, CPack is in charge of making the debian package but it seems that it does not meet all the requirements. We have to investigate to add all the rules needed to be added on the official debian repository. If you know mandatory requirements, we are interesting.
I will try to get the time to do the debianization of dff.
Great !
I just forked your tree on github (http://github.com/elthariel/dff).
Interesting :)
Updated by cma almost 2 years ago
fba wrote:
[...] If you know mandatory requirements, we are interesting.
As discussed with lta ; we have to provide ability to build in a separate directory.
I'm on it it will be commited in a few minute !
Updated by lta almost 2 years ago
- Target version set to 0.5.0
- % Done changed from 20 to 50
The work on the 'classical' debian package in going on. I think it is nearly finished and i will be able to upload it on my ppa. The source package is correctly building in the pbuilder environment.
Thank you for supporting out of tree build and helping me with my bugs, it shortened my work a lot.
Updated by lta almost 2 years ago
- % Done changed from 50 to 90
Alright guys, debian packages are available for ubuntu lucid i386 and amd64 are available on my launchpad ppa
https://launchpad.net/~elthariel/+archive/security
Using this you could easily build pacakges for other debian based system, provided that you also provide if necessary the debian pacakge of the correct version of swig along with the dff packages.
It would be nice if someone could try them on his system, to be sure they are not only working on my system.
The next step is to make the package comply with debian/ubuntu policy. The first step is to remove the warning and errors of lintian about the package (lintian is an automatic tool which check debian policy compliance).
Here is the output of lintian :
Now running lintian...
(irrelevant for ubuntu, and specially ppa) W: dff: new-package-should-close-itp-bug
W: dff: image-file-in-usr-lib usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/dff/ressources/dff.png
W: dff: image-file-in-usr-lib usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/dff/ressources/dff.xpm
W: dff: binary-without-manpage usr/bin/dff ;-)
E: dff: python-script-but-no-python-dep ./usr/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/dff/dff.py
Finished running lintian.
Updated by lta almost 2 years ago
- % Done changed from 90 to 70
Ok, the package is not working (still some path problems) I'll try to check this with cma tomorrow evening or i'll have a look at the build system.
Regards.
Updated by cma almost 2 years ago
python-magic is now required to run (ugly .so no longer versionned ... ;) ).
Just tested on Ubuntu 9.10 x86 it seams python-magic is missing, try to add it as dependency !
10.04 virtual machine for test is on the way.
Updated by lta almost 2 years ago
- Status changed from New to Closed
- % Done changed from 70 to 100
Thank you for pointing me to the solution (on another thread), python-magic wasn't mentionned as a dependency and wasn't installed. I think the packages should be fully functionnal !
Updated by lta almost 2 years ago
The packages for ubuntu lucid are available here : https://launchpad.net/~elthariel/+archive/security