> how does the autobuilder handle source dependencies ?
>
> does source dependencies exist, or are they handled by hand, i.e. you build
> everything, after that Hartmut or someone looks at the FAILED messages files,
> install some stuff, and then erase the FAILED messages as needed, so it will
> get built in the next run ?
>
> how does it handle packages like glib/gtk where glib needs to be installed
> before gtk can be built ?
We have a file with source-dependencies; some examples from it:
a2ps: tetex-bin
aalib: slang1-dev (>> 1.2.2-0), libgpmg1-dev (>= 1.14-3), libncurses4-dev
abacus: tcl8.0-dev, tk8.0-dev, flex, bison
abuse: !svgalib-dummyg1
ace-of-penguins: libgd1g-dev
amaya: lesstifg-dev
amcl: libgtk-dev (>= 1:1.0.5)
This is now generated by an tool from James Troup (andrea). The auto-builder
looks through this file for say 'abacus', see's that he needs tcl, tk, flex
and bison, calls apt-get to install this packages and builds it. Ready!
I get then an e-mail from the auto-builder (compile-log + changes file). If
this compile were successful i cat then the compile-log part from the e-mail,
pgp-ing the changes part and send this e-mail back to the auto-builder.
The other packages will fail for compile errors or bad dependencies. Packages
with bad dependencies will be rebuild after say 8 h or so. Packages with
compile errors: yeah ... only my part in in the past.
If you have an account on tervola: call list-building
There are currently 285 packages. This are all 'bad' packages, but this not
true for 100%. The source-dependencies file is currently for archs with
libc5 support, bash needs alt-gcc, alt-ncurses which aren't available on
powerpc. So bash will fail.
This is not a big problem. A much bigger one is that the developers doesn't
fix her bugs!!! Ok, lets wait for official slink release! :-)
Greetings,
Hartmut
