Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansi...@chromium.org> writes: > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:37 PM Alyssa Ross <h...@alyssa.is> wrote: > >> Alyssa Ross <h...@alyssa.is> writes: >> >> > Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansi...@chromium.org> writes: >> > >> >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 12:11 AM Alyssa Ross <h...@alyssa.is> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansi...@chromium.org> writes: >> >>> >> >>> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 4:07 AM Alyssa Ross <h...@alyssa.is> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> Gurchetan Singh <gurchetansi...@chromium.org> writes: >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > - Official "release commits" issued for rutabaga_gfx_ffi, >> >>> >> > gfxstream, aemu-base. For example, see crrev.com/c/4778941 >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > - The release commits can make packaging easier, though once >> >>> >> > again all known users will likely just build from sources >> >>> >> > anyways >> >>> >> >> >>> >> It's a small thing, but could there be actual tags, rather than just >> >>> >> blessed commits? It'd just make them easier to find, and save a >> bit of >> >>> >> time in review for packages. >> >>> >> >> >>> > >> >>> > I added: >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> https://crosvm.dev/book/appendix/rutabaga_gfx.html#latest-releases-for-potential-packaging >> >>> > >> >>> > Tags are possible, but I want to clarify the use case before >> packaging. >> >>> > Where are you thinking of packaging it for (Debian??)? Are you mostly >> >>> > interested in Wayland passthrough (my guess) or gfxstream too? >> Depending >> >>> > your use case, we may be able to minimize the work involved. >> >>> >> >>> Packaging for Nixpkgs (where I already maintain what to my knowledge is >> >>> the only crosvm distro package). I'm personally mostly interested in >> >>> Wayland passthroug, but I wouldn't be surprised if others are >> interested >> >>> in gfxstream. The packaging work is already done, I've just been >> >>> holding off actually pushing the packages waiting for the stable >> >>> releases. >> >>> >> >>> The reason that tags would be useful is that it allows a reviewer of >> the >> >>> package to see at a glance that the package is built from a stable >> >>> release. If it's just built from a commit hash, they have to go and >> >>> verify that it's a stable release, which is mildly annoying and >> >>> unconventional. >> >>> >> >> >> >> Understood. Request to have gfxstream and AEMU v0.1.2 release tags >> made. >> >> >> >> For rutabaga_gfx_ffi, is the crates.io upload sufficient? >> >> >> >> https://crates.io/crates/rutabaga_gfx_ffi >> >> >> >> Debian, for example, treats crates.io as the source of truth and builds >> >> tooling around that. I wonder if Nixpkgs as similar tooling around >> >> crates.io. >> > >> > We do, and I'll use the crates.io release for the package — good >> > suggestion, but it's still useful to also have a tag in a git repo. It >> > makes it easier if I need to do a bisect, for example. As a distro >> > developer, I'm frequently jumping across codebases I am not very >> > familiar with to try to track down regressions, etc., and it's much >> > easier when I don't have to learn some special quirk of the package like >> > not having git tags. >> >> Aha, trying to switch my package over to it has revealed that there is >> actually a reason not to use the crates.io release. It doesn't include >> a Cargo.lock, which would mean we'd have to obtain one from elsewhere. >> Either from the crosvm git repo, at which point we might just get all >> the sources from there, or by vendoring a Cargo.lock into our own git >> tree for packages, which we try to avoid because when you have a lot of >> them, they become quite a large proportion of the overall size of the >> repo. >> > > Ack. Request to have a rutabaga release tag in crosvm also made, should be > complete in a few days.
Thanks! I've found the rutabaga tag, but I still don't see any relevant tags for aemu or gfxstream. Any news there?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
