Hi, Morten. Sorry for the very late reply.
To reach a wider audience, I'm Cc'ing the people at debian-powerpc (to which I am subscribed), debian-68k (which probably has people with HFS+ filesystems), debian-amd64 (which possibly has people with newer Apple systems) and debian-mentors (which probably has someone that would like to get started packaging something with a patch system and that involves portability issues). On May 16 2008, Morten Kjeldgaard wrote: > Rogério Brito wrote: > > I would like to ask you two things: > > > > 1 - would it be possible to upgrade the package from the Debian > > repository? > > Packages in Ubuntu are synchronized with packages from Debian/unstable at > regular intervals. At the moment, packages are getting sync'ed into > Intrepid. It seems that hfsprogs revision -4 has already been imported into the Ubuntu repository for intrepid, but the version available for hardy is completely broken (the last time I checked). Please, do update it or please remove it from the distribution. It will have ill effects on people who depends on it. > > 2 - since I plan on packaging it so that it compiles on all arches > > available on Debian, I would like to ask if any of you would like to > > help me with this task in a cooperative way (I plan on creating a > > repository on Debian's Alioth service). > > We do uploads of source code (actually: source packages) that are compiled on > a set of build-hosts without human intervention (and so does Debian). I do know about that. > It is not possible to "tweak" compilations on a particular machine and > upload binary packages. Therefore, the package should be able to handle > the different architectures automatically, and if something special needs > to be set (compiler options or such) it should be take care of in > debian/rules. This is why I am asking for some helping hand on maintaining the package: it currently consists of a huge patch taken from Gentoo, together with some patches of mine, all applied to hfsprogs with the help of quilt. The problem is the following: while my patches are designed to address just one issue and are easily disabled, the patch from Gentoo is a monolithic thing that changes things from trivial to quite essential things and this prevents the upload of a newer upstream version of the tools. > It is more difficult to handle different patches for different platforms, > and > although it can be done, it is discouraged. The closest to being acceptable > is passing different arguments to ./configure, and of course your code can > rely on #ifdefs etc. BTW, there is no "./configure" thing in this packaging of Apple's utilities. > Putting your project on alioth is a good idea, and perhaps your best bets is > to collaborate with the Debian maintainers to get the package compile & > working. Then those packages will quickly show up in Ubuntu. Perhaps I was misunderstood the first time and now my idea is clearer, but I am interested in getting feedback from Ubuntu. The way you wrote the sentences above give me (what I wouldn't like to believe) a bad impression of the MOTUs regarding just getting the job done. I hope that I am mistaken. Regards, -- Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED],ime.usp}.br : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8 http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito : http://meusite.mackenzie.com.br/rbrito Projects: algorithms.berlios.de : lame.sf.net : vrms.alioth.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
