On 02/02/2025 2:43 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 7:42 PM Nicolas Peugnet <nico...@club1.fr> wrote:
Then I realized that the docker.io package is in fact a "Multiple
Upstream Tarballs" package, and as the cli, engine and buildkit are all
inter-dependent of each other, I think it would probably be better to
add "moby/buildkit" in the docker.io source package.
So about this, what do you think? For now, I will continue to work on
the separated package for "moby/buildkit", but wouldn't it be better if
it were part of the docker.io package?
I took a look at the docker.io package, to refresh my recollection
on the topic of dependencies, and I think I agree with you.
If I understand things correctly, we currently get away with that by keeping
"buildkit" in the "vendor/" directory. You are suggesting to promote that
dependency as part of the MUT upload.
Yes, exactly.
That sounds reasonable. Can you work on a MR to modify the docker.io package
to incorporate this new tarball?
I'll try to do it, but I've never worked with MUT packages yet. I'll
take look at the README.source.
In the meantime, I managed to build locally a docker-buildx package that
seems to work quite well. It needs 3 more dependencies to be packaged in
Debian in addition to "moby/buildkit".
I will post ITPs for them soon.
--
Nicolas Peugnet
