files in .deb
how can include other my own serperat file in .deb package file so that after when package will be insgtalled that file go to my specified location.where should i specify that file and its location..in debain pakcage Thanks _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: files in .deb
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Sheraz Khan wrote: > how can include other my own serperat file in .deb package file so that > after when package will be insgtalled that file go to my specified > location.where should i specify that file and its location..in > debain pakcage If you're trying to do what I think you're trying to do, you'll want to do the following steps (you'll need to read some documentation, such as the developers reference and some man pages, to get the specifics): * Install the source package using 'apt-get source' * Add your file to the package somewhere * Modify debian/rules (or possibly one of the debhelper config files if it's using debhelper) to install your file at a particular location * Bump the package version using dch -v * Rebuild using dpkg-buildpackage * Install your newly built package with dpkg If you want to supply a concrete example, I'm happy to discuss specifics on the list. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: files in .deb
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:57:02PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> * Add your file to the package somewhere
You should put it in the debian/ directory. If its a binary file, you
have to uuencode it (to make diff happy) and on install uudecode it.
There is a perl script attached for this.
Cheers, Bastian
--
Bastian Kleineidam
Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor
#!/usr/bin/perl
$_ = <> until ($mode,$file) = /^begin\s*(\d*)\s*(\S*)/;
open(OUT,"> $file") if $file ne "";
while (<>) {
last if /^end/;
next if /[a-z]/;
next unless intord() - 32) & 077) + 2) / 3) ==
int(length() / 4);
print OUT unpack "u", $_;
}
chmod oct $mode, $file;
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, here are some of my tips when packaging unofficial software as .debs. Perhaps its useful for someone :) Packaging tips for unofficial packages == Maintainer email - You can set the DEBEMAIL environment variable if you like to have a different email address for Debian packaging. Example: export [EMAIL PROTECTED] Native Package or not? - -- Short answer: don't make a native package. Be sure to provide a .orig.tar.gz before calling $(DEBUILD). a) Download the original mypackage-1.0.tar.gz b) Rename it to an original upstream file (notice the underscore instead of a dash): mv mypackage-1.0.tar.gz mypackage_1.0.orig.tar.gz c) Untar it and run dh_make, answer its questions: tar xzvf mypackage_1.0.orig.tar.gz cd mypackage-1.0 && dh_make; cd .. d) As we have already the orig.tar.gz, delete the .orig tree: rm -rf mypackage-1.0.orig e) edit mypackage-1.0/debian/* and build your debian package (see below for the $(DEBUILD) variable): cd mypackage-1.0 && $(DEBUILD) Package version - --- The Debian package version number is parsed from the top entry of debian/changelog, eg. "mypackage (1.1-0.1) unstable; urgency=low". Notice here the "-0.1", this is the debian internal number, and it must be lower than "-1" for unofficial packages. Subsequent releases must have "-0.2", "-0.3", etc. An official package will have "1.1-1". If there is already an official package eg with version "1.1-4", then use "1.1-4.1", "1.1-4.2", ... Package description - --- If you already maintain official Debian packages, your package description can note that this is not an official one. I usually add these two lines in front of the package description to remind users that even if this package is signed by my GPG key, its not an official one: File debian/control: Description: this is mypackage *** Unofficial package from [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** . Bug reports - --- The standard tool for reporting bugs is "reportbug". Your package should have: File /usr/share/bug/mypackage/control: Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See /usr/share/doc/reportbug/README.developers for more info. Building the package - You should sign your packages with your GPG key. Run "gpg --gen-key" to generate one. You can also use my patch at http://bugs.debian.org/178456 to add --linda option to debuild. Here is the debuild line I am using right now (you have to replace 32EC6F3E with your own GPG key id): File Makefile: # run debuild, log everything to [EMAIL PROTECTED] define DEBUILD (debuild -pgpg -sgpg -k32EC6F3E -tc -L -i 2>/dev/stdout && echo "built ok" > ../$@) | tee ../[EMAIL PROTECTED] endef mypackage: cd mypackage-1.1 && $(DEBUILD) Making it apt-get'able - -- a) Configure dput: File /home/joe/.dput.cf: [local] fqdn = localhost incoming = /home/joe/myarchive allow_unsigned_uploads = 0 b) Copy all mypackage files into your archive: dput local mypackage_1.1-0.1.changes c) Change into the myarchive directory and call: apt-ftparchive sources . | gzip -9 > Sources.gz apt-ftparchive packages . | gzip -9 > Packages.gz d) As root, add the deb and deb-src line: File /etc/apt/sources.list: # ... more deb lines above deb file:/home/joe/myarchive ./ deb-src file:/home/joe/myarchive ./ e) make it available for others by putting myarchive on a webserver. Then others can have File /etc/apt/sources.list: # my http repository deb http://www.joesdomain.org/~joe/myarchive ./ deb-src http://www.joesdomain.org/~joe/myarchive ./ Cheers, Bastian - -- Bastian Kleineidam Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+X4FbeBwlBDLsbz4RAml6AKDFvK2jPyZvGR0ceE30MtlQ7t++DwCbBTSU IDTwzU66KSeQD1b2MjNg+HY= =qYHC -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > Hi, > > here are some of my tips when packaging unofficial software as .debs. > Perhaps its useful for someone :) > [SNIP] > If there is already an official package eg with version "1.1-4", then > use "1.1-4.1", "1.1-4.2", ... this reflects the same scheme as the NMU and you should be carefull using it. What we do for debian-ipv6 is something like x.y-z.ipv6.rN where N is the "internal" version. The problem might occour if in debian there is x.y-z and in an external archive x.y-z.1 and suddenly in debian it will enter x.y-z.1 because of a real NMU. There was someone having problems related to the same version of the software presents in 2 different archives and apt-get was always downloading one of them.. can't remember exactly the details sorry, but i am farly sure that there is an open bug about it. I would also add something about dependencies. Be sure to build always againt the main debian archive and in the worst case with pkgs that are in your external archive of which you have control of. This should atleast ensure a lower risk of "fried" systems. Do not rely on thirdy part archives even for the smallest piece of software. - From my small experience out of maintaing debian-ipv6 i would also suggest to write a script that checks daily what is in debian and what is in your archive. Specially if your archive propose updates against official debian pkgs. It will help keeping track of the situation and somehow give you a direction for your work as external maintainer. BTW never forget that external archive can be as dangerous as usefull. Warn ALWAYS the user that is not an official repository and don't use it only for your own "glory".. help the official maintainer with what it will come out of its usage. Regards Fabio PS I just realized i wrote "you" everywhere but it refers moslty to people that want to build their archive :- - -- drac (1.11-7) unstable; urgency=low * added IPv6 patch from the great IPv6 Team -- Noel Koethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:33:00 +0100 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+X5eThCzbekR3nhgRAjqPAJ4+N6mtfG46kI0yoRLJj02FnE5+nACfSsm6 JUinoKBqYOH3TGdLFQoeN7s= =mNf6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fre, 2003-02-28 at 18:08, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > I would also add something about dependencies. Be sure to build always > againt the main debian archive and in the worst case with pkgs that are in > your external archive of which you have control of. This should atleast > ensure a lower risk of "fried" systems. Do not rely on thirdy part > archives even for the smallest piece of software. I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other build time side effects. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 04:33:47PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > Bug reports > --- > The standard tool for reporting bugs is "reportbug". > Your package should have: > File /usr/share/bug/mypackage/control: > Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > See /usr/share/doc/reportbug/README.developers for more info. I think it is better to use "Bugs: " in control. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Thanks for you tips! But still some questions remain:
On Friday 28 February 2003 16:33, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Native Package or not?
> --
> Short answer: don't make a native package.
Can you explain 'native package'? Did you mean 'binary-only' package by that?
> Be sure to provide a
> .orig.tar.gz before calling $(DEBUILD).
Hmm, dh_make is trying to do a similar approach. Why not use that way?
In addition i have some questions to the Depends section in debian/control:
${shlibs:Depends} is a nice feature, but i think for many packages/libraries
it is way to strict, because it's always using the versions of installed
packages which may not be necessary. So what's the best/common way to handle
this?
It is possible to let ${shlibs:Depends} do its job and then lower that
requirements? Or is this approach to dangerous and the one and only solution
is always building on a 'clean' woody?
To be somewhat concret:
Currently i am building an inoffical package for k3b (for woody/sarge). I have
KDE3.1 installed and am building against that. But k3b only requires KDE
higher 3.x. So i wonder if i could lower the corresponding entry in the
Depends section?
Thanks in advance
Henning
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBPl+2WxbKLUjq1HQVAQFd2gf/dzZOyW1Ykz0hAOQXnPby6PZ9bBPZ2VFB
sq+IP1xRyR2qGLjy0FRTLBbo8/PX1qFhsOsmmzZOTGm/fp8i3s2iS57PYxJEfteS
01P0gAQ1jNIHHrBKlXC0Kkeo918fkJcbvqE2e0oJvH4mnpEnvrIKFMiMmDSfy9Yl
eXHOnWEgUwpeDtE62cRhlstN3ROAryz78ZAZpTJybTnjuC3IzjaKlrUigAs8Aie0
8a+IESyLaknZXF3+V6HSfkMpblv/95MAVcJCh8IaFi0f2KQZvUydazT/mhPVwKOB
AZgLyAfp+czt1IIrlc1QD2h4TfwEl9rQHotsl13fN9CuvLKllRKZNw==
=1mDA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to build a package from cvs.
Hi. OpenEXR is about to release a new version, but upstream wants a bit of mass--checking before that happens. I am (have already) building a new package from the cvs tree, but my question is: Shall I run the autobuild (called bootstrap) on my system and go with the package using those results or I shall modify my debian/rules to create the Makefile.in and friends during compilation time? It would force some modifications in debian/control to use the right automake and so on... TIA, mooch -- Jesus Climent | Unix SysAdm | Helsinki, Finland | pumuki.hispalinux.es GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429 7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69 -- Registered Linux user #66350 proudly using Debian Sid & Linux 2.4.20 It's a soldier's duty. You wouldn't understand. --The Colonel (Akira) pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:02:05PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other > build time side effects. I tested it several weeks ago and it did not work for me. Perhaps I should give it another try. Cheers, Bastian - -- Bastian Kleineidam Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+X78deBwlBDLsbz4RAs9qAJ487FxPBfMMsFGsnaRgW6nWzzD+pgCeLviv 6S8xEvoxxvQlvbLSMMHXgL0= =pLbb -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 06:08:23PM +0100, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > BTW never forget that external archive can be as dangerous as usefull. > Warn ALWAYS the user that is not an official repository and don't use it > only for your own "glory".. help the official maintainer with what it will > come out of its usage. Glory is an interesting choice of word. I've packaged several small applications because I wanted to be able to install them upon my Debian boxen. By making them packages I can do this in a simple consistent and auditable manner. Each package usually contains a single script and manpage, not something I'd suggest uploading to Debian proper, especially as in recent times the phrase "archive bloat" gets bandied around an awful lot. By sharing those packages I'm helping other users who'd want them, whilst reducing the load upon the main Debian package repository and it's mirrors. Surely this is a win win situation for everybody? Any glory is really going to upstream (OK me in my case) for writing the code which others want, not to the packager, or maintainer of the debs. I guess the only tricky part is knowing when a package is sufficiently popular that it should go into Debian for real. I've not reached that point with any of my little .debs, but I can imagine others have. As an aside I wonder how well SE-Linux, or the other improved security patches handle installation issues? I know that by installing a random package you're effectively giving the package maintainer root upon your box. I'd imagine that a package installation process needs to have full write access to your machine to do it's job, so most of the policies that would prevent random hacks would be disabled. If anybody could explain this to me I'd be very greatful. Steve --- # Some random debs. www.steve.org.uk/apt/ pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:57:18PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:02:05PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other > > build time side effects. > I tested it several weeks ago and it did not work for me. Perhaps I > should give it another try. A while ago sid was apparently uninstallable. I had the same problem. I tried again about two weeks ago and it worked then. Frank > > Cheers, > Bastian > > - -- > Bastian Kleineidam > > Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQE+X78deBwlBDLsbz4RAs9qAJ487FxPBfMMsFGsnaRgW6nWzzD+pgCeLviv > 6S8xEvoxxvQlvbLSMMHXgL0= > =pLbb > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:19:51PM +0100, Henning Moll wrote:
> Thanks for you tips! But still some questions remain:
>
> On Friday 28 February 2003 16:33, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> > Native Package or not?
> > --
> > Short answer: don't make a native package.
>
> Can you explain 'native package'? Did you mean 'binary-only' package by that?
A native package is one without a .orig.tar.gz (see dh_make(1)).
Everytime you upgrade a native package, you'll upload the complete
source code (.deb, .diff.gz, .changes, .dsc, .tar.gz).
Upgrading a non-native package usually uploads (.deb, .diff.gz, .changes,
.dsc) and only once .orig.tar.gz.
> > Be sure to provide a
> > .orig.tar.gz before calling $(DEBUILD).
>
> Hmm, dh_make is trying to do a similar approach. Why not use that way?
I like to have the original .tar.gz exactly as I downloaded it. dh_make
unpacks the source and repacks it to a new .orig.tar.gz.
> In addition i have some questions to the Depends section in debian/control:
> ${shlibs:Depends} is a nice feature, but i think for many packages/libraries
> it is way to strict, because it's always using the versions of installed
> packages which may not be necessary. So what's the best/common way to handle
> this?
The library version number is there for some reason: binary compatibility.
If you drop the version number from library depends, your package may
break when a new library is there.
> It is possible to let ${shlibs:Depends} do its job and then lower that
> requirements?
Its possible, but its not recommended.
> To be somewhat concret:
> Currently i am building an inoffical package for k3b (for woody/sarge). I have
> KDE3.1 installed and am building against that. But k3b only requires KDE
> higher 3.x. So i wonder if i could lower the corresponding entry in the
> Depends section?
I am not sure that all kde libraries are binary compatible between 3.1
and 3.0 versions. Just leave the depends as they are.
Cheers,
Bastian
- --
Bastian Kleineidam
Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+X8TCeBwlBDLsbz4RAuvbAJ0fgLFcBWL4HEH+1jQ0T/ZWErJKswCfZinH
/0CPr8KzI37tdhzbpcA3dI4=
=a0te
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RFS: makepp -- yet another make replacement
makepp is a drop-in replacement for GNU make which has a number of
features that allow for more reliable builds and simpler build
files. It supports almost all of the syntax that GNU make supports,
and can be used with makefiles produced by utilities such as
automake. It is called makepp (or make++) because it was designed
for building C++ programs, and its relationship to make is analogous
to C++'s relationship to C. For backward compatibility, it will work
with input files designed for make, but there are much better ways to
do things.
Find my packages at
http://www.speakeasy.net/~itz/hacks/
in the files makepp-1.18*.
Thanks!
--
Ian Zimmerman, Oakland, California, U.S.A.
if (sizeof(signed) > sizeof(unsigned) + 4) { delete this; }
GPG: 433BA087 9C0F 194F 203A 63F7 B1B8 6E5A 8CA3 27DB 433B A087
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:19:51PM +0100, Henning Moll wrote:
> > In addition i have some questions to the Depends section in
> > debian/control: ${shlibs:Depends} is a nice feature, but i think
> > for many packages/libraries it is way to strict, because it's
> > always using the versions of installed packages which may not be
> > necessary. So what's the best/common way to handle this?
>
> The library version number is there for some reason: binary compatibility.
> If you drop the version number from library depends, your package may
> break when a new library is there.
I think you meant when an old library is there, not an new one. Since
libraries are not meant to be forward compatible moving code compiled
with a newer library to an older one might not work. The older one
did not know about the newer one. They are designed to be backward
compatible in that moving to a newer library should work. The newer
one knows about the older one. Assuming that is what you meant or
please correct me.
Bob
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Steve Kemp wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 06:08:23PM +0100, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > > BTW never forget that external archive can be as dangerous as usefull. > > Warn ALWAYS the user that is not an official repository and don't use it > > only for your own "glory".. help the official maintainer with what it will > > come out of its usage. > > Glory is an interesting choice of word. I choose it carefully to underline what the Social Contract states: "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" basically (atleast in my specific case) when i started debian-ipv6 archive i did with a specific purpoues to give people something more, exactly like you do. But personally i do not care of getting "credits" for it. I am much more glad to share the credits inside the team since it is a work done by several people and developers (as you can read by my signature of which I am extremely proud :-) ). > Surely this is a win win situation for everybody? Any glory is really > going to upstream (OK me in my case) for writing the code > which others want, not to the packager, or maintainer of the debs. I agree with you. my concern is that sometimes people do not see that far inside what they have. not blaming anyone here but look at X for example. I did never see someone on irc saying: "hey cool they released X4.3 ... great job they did" but only things like: "hey Branden X4.3 is out when will you package it?". Probably we often forget that we are "only" (well me not yet :-) ) a layer between the upstream and the user. > I guess the only tricky part is knowing when a package is sufficiently > popular that it should go into Debian for real. I've not reached > that point with any of my little .debs, but I can imagine others > have. IMHO even the smallest bit is important. probably we are lacking a way to understand how users make use of that bit and understand how mush usefull is or not... -- drac (1.11-7) unstable; urgency=low * added IPv6 patch from the great IPv6 Team -- Noel Koethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:33:00 +0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Fre, 2003-02-28 at 18:08, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > > > I would also add something about dependencies. Be sure to build always > > againt the main debian archive and in the worst case with pkgs that are in > > your external archive of which you have control of. This should atleast > > ensure a lower risk of "fried" systems. Do not rely on thirdy part > > archives even for the smallest piece of software. > > I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other > build time side effects. > pbuilder is great. as well as the flexibility of its configuration that permits to add as many sources as you want. i expect an expert users that is building its own archive perfectly capable of changing pbuilder config. -- drac (1.11-7) unstable; urgency=low * added IPv6 patch from the great IPv6 Team -- Noel Koethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:33:00 +0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
New Maintainer ou New Developer
Hi mentors, I'm looking for information about debian developer/maintainer. I read in debian page that the only way to became maintainer is developing some nice program, but I have two friends that are only who make the .deb package. The situation is: I don't have a nice package develped by me, but I would like to maintain some package from someone who don't have interest or time to maintain it on debian. How can I find a package to maintain or how can I submit a package (not mine) ? Thanks for your atention. ps: I have my gpg key signed by a debian developer (Gustavo Noronha Silva [EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- --- Agney Lopes Roth Ferraz [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
request for sponsorship
Hello: I'd like to request for someone to sponsor the following unofficial packages I have: snes9express (1.39-beta) - a GUI frontend for SNES9x (as far as I know this is still an orphaned package); and visualboy advance (a gameboy/gameboy color/gameboy advance emulator for Linux). The said packages can be obtained in this apt source location: deb http://csdev.cas.upm.edu.ph/~pfalcone/debian unstable main non-free deb-src http://csdev.cas.upm.edu.ph/~pfalcone/debian unstable main non-free Thank you. -- Paolo Alexis Falcone [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
files in .deb
how can include other my own serperat file in .deb package file so that after when package will be insgtalled that file go to my specified location.where should i specify that file and its location..in debain pakcage Thanks _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: files in .deb
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Sheraz Khan wrote: > how can include other my own serperat file in .deb package file so that > after when package will be insgtalled that file go to my specified > location.where should i specify that file and its location..in > debain pakcage If you're trying to do what I think you're trying to do, you'll want to do the following steps (you'll need to read some documentation, such as the developers reference and some man pages, to get the specifics): * Install the source package using 'apt-get source' * Add your file to the package somewhere * Modify debian/rules (or possibly one of the debhelper config files if it's using debhelper) to install your file at a particular location * Bump the package version using dch -v * Rebuild using dpkg-buildpackage * Install your newly built package with dpkg If you want to supply a concrete example, I'm happy to discuss specifics on the list. -- Matthew Palmer, Debian Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org
Re: files in .deb
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:57:02PM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> * Add your file to the package somewhere
You should put it in the debian/ directory. If its a binary file, you
have to uuencode it (to make diff happy) and on install uudecode it.
There is a perl script attached for this.
Cheers, Bastian
--
Bastian Kleineidam
Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor
#!/usr/bin/perl
$_ = <> until ($mode,$file) = /^begin\s*(\d*)\s*(\S*)/;
open(OUT,"> $file") if $file ne "";
while (<>) {
last if /^end/;
next if /[a-z]/;
next unless intord() - 32) & 077) + 2) / 3) ==
int(length() / 4);
print OUT unpack "u", $_;
}
chmod oct $mode, $file;
pgpQcub1ohjVc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, here are some of my tips when packaging unofficial software as .debs. Perhaps its useful for someone :) Packaging tips for unofficial packages == Maintainer email - You can set the DEBEMAIL environment variable if you like to have a different email address for Debian packaging. Example: export [EMAIL PROTECTED] Native Package or not? - -- Short answer: don't make a native package. Be sure to provide a .orig.tar.gz before calling $(DEBUILD). a) Download the original mypackage-1.0.tar.gz b) Rename it to an original upstream file (notice the underscore instead of a dash): mv mypackage-1.0.tar.gz mypackage_1.0.orig.tar.gz c) Untar it and run dh_make, answer its questions: tar xzvf mypackage_1.0.orig.tar.gz cd mypackage-1.0 && dh_make; cd .. d) As we have already the orig.tar.gz, delete the .orig tree: rm -rf mypackage-1.0.orig e) edit mypackage-1.0/debian/* and build your debian package (see below for the $(DEBUILD) variable): cd mypackage-1.0 && $(DEBUILD) Package version - --- The Debian package version number is parsed from the top entry of debian/changelog, eg. "mypackage (1.1-0.1) unstable; urgency=low". Notice here the "-0.1", this is the debian internal number, and it must be lower than "-1" for unofficial packages. Subsequent releases must have "-0.2", "-0.3", etc. An official package will have "1.1-1". If there is already an official package eg with version "1.1-4", then use "1.1-4.1", "1.1-4.2", ... Package description - --- If you already maintain official Debian packages, your package description can note that this is not an official one. I usually add these two lines in front of the package description to remind users that even if this package is signed by my GPG key, its not an official one: File debian/control: Description: this is mypackage *** Unofficial package from [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** . Bug reports - --- The standard tool for reporting bugs is "reportbug". Your package should have: File /usr/share/bug/mypackage/control: Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See /usr/share/doc/reportbug/README.developers for more info. Building the package - You should sign your packages with your GPG key. Run "gpg --gen-key" to generate one. You can also use my patch at http://bugs.debian.org/178456 to add --linda option to debuild. Here is the debuild line I am using right now (you have to replace 32EC6F3E with your own GPG key id): File Makefile: # run debuild, log everything to [EMAIL PROTECTED] define DEBUILD (debuild -pgpg -sgpg -k32EC6F3E -tc -L -i 2>/dev/stdout && echo "built ok" > ../$@) | tee ../[EMAIL PROTECTED] endef mypackage: cd mypackage-1.1 && $(DEBUILD) Making it apt-get'able - -- a) Configure dput: File /home/joe/.dput.cf: [local] fqdn = localhost incoming = /home/joe/myarchive allow_unsigned_uploads = 0 b) Copy all mypackage files into your archive: dput local mypackage_1.1-0.1.changes c) Change into the myarchive directory and call: apt-ftparchive sources . | gzip -9 > Sources.gz apt-ftparchive packages . | gzip -9 > Packages.gz d) As root, add the deb and deb-src line: File /etc/apt/sources.list: # ... more deb lines above deb file:/home/joe/myarchive ./ deb-src file:/home/joe/myarchive ./ e) make it available for others by putting myarchive on a webserver. Then others can have File /etc/apt/sources.list: # my http repository deb http://www.joesdomain.org/~joe/myarchive ./ deb-src http://www.joesdomain.org/~joe/myarchive ./ Cheers, Bastian - -- Bastian Kleineidam Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+X4FbeBwlBDLsbz4RAml6AKDFvK2jPyZvGR0ceE30MtlQ7t++DwCbBTSU IDTwzU66KSeQD1b2MjNg+HY= =qYHC -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > Hi, > > here are some of my tips when packaging unofficial software as .debs. > Perhaps its useful for someone :) > [SNIP] > If there is already an official package eg with version "1.1-4", then > use "1.1-4.1", "1.1-4.2", ... this reflects the same scheme as the NMU and you should be carefull using it. What we do for debian-ipv6 is something like x.y-z.ipv6.rN where N is the "internal" version. The problem might occour if in debian there is x.y-z and in an external archive x.y-z.1 and suddenly in debian it will enter x.y-z.1 because of a real NMU. There was someone having problems related to the same version of the software presents in 2 different archives and apt-get was always downloading one of them.. can't remember exactly the details sorry, but i am farly sure that there is an open bug about it. I would also add something about dependencies. Be sure to build always againt the main debian archive and in the worst case with pkgs that are in your external archive of which you have control of. This should atleast ensure a lower risk of "fried" systems. Do not rely on thirdy part archives even for the smallest piece of software. - From my small experience out of maintaing debian-ipv6 i would also suggest to write a script that checks daily what is in debian and what is in your archive. Specially if your archive propose updates against official debian pkgs. It will help keeping track of the situation and somehow give you a direction for your work as external maintainer. BTW never forget that external archive can be as dangerous as usefull. Warn ALWAYS the user that is not an official repository and don't use it only for your own "glory".. help the official maintainer with what it will come out of its usage. Regards Fabio PS I just realized i wrote "you" everywhere but it refers moslty to people that want to build their archive :- - -- drac (1.11-7) unstable; urgency=low * added IPv6 patch from the great IPv6 Team -- Noel Koethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:33:00 +0100 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+X5eThCzbekR3nhgRAjqPAJ4+N6mtfG46kI0yoRLJj02FnE5+nACfSsm6 JUinoKBqYOH3TGdLFQoeN7s= =mNf6 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fre, 2003-02-28 at 18:08, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > I would also add something about dependencies. Be sure to build always > againt the main debian archive and in the worst case with pkgs that are in > your external archive of which you have control of. This should atleast > ensure a lower risk of "fried" systems. Do not rely on thirdy part > archives even for the smallest piece of software. I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other build time side effects. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 04:33:47PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > Bug reports > --- > The standard tool for reporting bugs is "reportbug". > Your package should have: > File /usr/share/bug/mypackage/control: > Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > See /usr/share/doc/reportbug/README.developers for more info. I think it is better to use "Bugs: " in control. -- - mdz
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Thanks for you tips! But still some questions remain:
On Friday 28 February 2003 16:33, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> Native Package or not?
> --
> Short answer: don't make a native package.
Can you explain 'native package'? Did you mean 'binary-only' package by that?
> Be sure to provide a
> .orig.tar.gz before calling $(DEBUILD).
Hmm, dh_make is trying to do a similar approach. Why not use that way?
In addition i have some questions to the Depends section in debian/control:
${shlibs:Depends} is a nice feature, but i think for many packages/libraries
it is way to strict, because it's always using the versions of installed
packages which may not be necessary. So what's the best/common way to handle
this?
It is possible to let ${shlibs:Depends} do its job and then lower that
requirements? Or is this approach to dangerous and the one and only solution
is always building on a 'clean' woody?
To be somewhat concret:
Currently i am building an inoffical package for k3b (for woody/sarge). I have
KDE3.1 installed and am building against that. But k3b only requires KDE
higher 3.x. So i wonder if i could lower the corresponding entry in the
Depends section?
Thanks in advance
Henning
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBPl+2WxbKLUjq1HQVAQFd2gf/dzZOyW1Ykz0hAOQXnPby6PZ9bBPZ2VFB
sq+IP1xRyR2qGLjy0FRTLBbo8/PX1qFhsOsmmzZOTGm/fp8i3s2iS57PYxJEfteS
01P0gAQ1jNIHHrBKlXC0Kkeo918fkJcbvqE2e0oJvH4mnpEnvrIKFMiMmDSfy9Yl
eXHOnWEgUwpeDtE62cRhlstN3ROAryz78ZAZpTJybTnjuC3IzjaKlrUigAs8Aie0
8a+IESyLaknZXF3+V6HSfkMpblv/95MAVcJCh8IaFi0f2KQZvUydazT/mhPVwKOB
AZgLyAfp+czt1IIrlc1QD2h4TfwEl9rQHotsl13fN9CuvLKllRKZNw==
=1mDA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
How to build a package from cvs.
Hi. OpenEXR is about to release a new version, but upstream wants a bit of mass--checking before that happens. I am (have already) building a new package from the cvs tree, but my question is: Shall I run the autobuild (called bootstrap) on my system and go with the package using those results or I shall modify my debian/rules to create the Makefile.in and friends during compilation time? It would force some modifications in debian/control to use the right automake and so on... TIA, mooch -- Jesus Climent | Unix SysAdm | Helsinki, Finland | pumuki.hispalinux.es GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429 7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69 -- Registered Linux user #66350 proudly using Debian Sid & Linux 2.4.20 It's a soldier's duty. You wouldn't understand. --The Colonel (Akira) pgpcWCMl3kHG5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:02:05PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other > build time side effects. I tested it several weeks ago and it did not work for me. Perhaps I should give it another try. Cheers, Bastian - -- Bastian Kleineidam Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+X78deBwlBDLsbz4RAs9qAJ487FxPBfMMsFGsnaRgW6nWzzD+pgCeLviv 6S8xEvoxxvQlvbLSMMHXgL0= =pLbb -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 06:08:23PM +0100, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > BTW never forget that external archive can be as dangerous as usefull. > Warn ALWAYS the user that is not an official repository and don't use it > only for your own "glory".. help the official maintainer with what it will > come out of its usage. Glory is an interesting choice of word. I've packaged several small applications because I wanted to be able to install them upon my Debian boxen. By making them packages I can do this in a simple consistent and auditable manner. Each package usually contains a single script and manpage, not something I'd suggest uploading to Debian proper, especially as in recent times the phrase "archive bloat" gets bandied around an awful lot. By sharing those packages I'm helping other users who'd want them, whilst reducing the load upon the main Debian package repository and it's mirrors. Surely this is a win win situation for everybody? Any glory is really going to upstream (OK me in my case) for writing the code which others want, not to the packager, or maintainer of the debs. I guess the only tricky part is knowing when a package is sufficiently popular that it should go into Debian for real. I've not reached that point with any of my little .debs, but I can imagine others have. As an aside I wonder how well SE-Linux, or the other improved security patches handle installation issues? I know that by installing a random package you're effectively giving the package maintainer root upon your box. I'd imagine that a package installation process needs to have full write access to your machine to do it's job, so most of the policies that would prevent random hacks would be disabled. If anybody could explain this to me I'd be very greatful. Steve --- # Some random debs. www.steve.org.uk/apt/ pgpytOXjcWIBh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:57:18PM +0100, Bastian Kleineidam wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 07:02:05PM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other > > build time side effects. > I tested it several weeks ago and it did not work for me. Perhaps I > should give it another try. A while ago sid was apparently uninstallable. I had the same problem. I tried again about two weeks ago and it worked then. Frank > > Cheers, > Bastian > > - -- > Bastian Kleineidam > > Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQE+X78deBwlBDLsbz4RAs9qAJ487FxPBfMMsFGsnaRgW6nWzzD+pgCeLviv > 6S8xEvoxxvQlvbLSMMHXgL0= > =pLbb > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Unofficial package tips
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:19:51PM +0100, Henning Moll wrote:
> Thanks for you tips! But still some questions remain:
>
> On Friday 28 February 2003 16:33, Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> > Native Package or not?
> > --
> > Short answer: don't make a native package.
>
> Can you explain 'native package'? Did you mean 'binary-only' package by that?
A native package is one without a .orig.tar.gz (see dh_make(1)).
Everytime you upgrade a native package, you'll upload the complete
source code (.deb, .diff.gz, .changes, .dsc, .tar.gz).
Upgrading a non-native package usually uploads (.deb, .diff.gz, .changes,
.dsc) and only once .orig.tar.gz.
> > Be sure to provide a
> > .orig.tar.gz before calling $(DEBUILD).
>
> Hmm, dh_make is trying to do a similar approach. Why not use that way?
I like to have the original .tar.gz exactly as I downloaded it. dh_make
unpacks the source and repacks it to a new .orig.tar.gz.
> In addition i have some questions to the Depends section in debian/control:
> ${shlibs:Depends} is a nice feature, but i think for many packages/libraries
> it is way to strict, because it's always using the versions of installed
> packages which may not be necessary. So what's the best/common way to handle
> this?
The library version number is there for some reason: binary compatibility.
If you drop the version number from library depends, your package may
break when a new library is there.
> It is possible to let ${shlibs:Depends} do its job and then lower that
> requirements?
Its possible, but its not recommended.
> To be somewhat concret:
> Currently i am building an inoffical package for k3b (for woody/sarge). I have
> KDE3.1 installed and am building against that. But k3b only requires KDE
> higher 3.x. So i wonder if i could lower the corresponding entry in the
> Depends section?
I am not sure that all kde libraries are binary compatible between 3.1
and 3.0 versions. Just leave the depends as they are.
Cheers,
Bastian
- --
Bastian Kleineidam
Atombombe · Plutonium · Fat Man · Do it Yourself · Tim Taylor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+X8TCeBwlBDLsbz4RAuvbAJ0fgLFcBWL4HEH+1jQ0T/ZWErJKswCfZinH
/0CPr8KzI37tdhzbpcA3dI4=
=a0te
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
RFS: makepp -- yet another make replacement
makepp is a drop-in replacement for GNU make which has a number of
features that allow for more reliable builds and simpler build
files. It supports almost all of the syntax that GNU make supports,
and can be used with makefiles produced by utilities such as
automake. It is called makepp (or make++) because it was designed
for building C++ programs, and its relationship to make is analogous
to C++'s relationship to C. For backward compatibility, it will work
with input files designed for make, but there are much better ways to
do things.
Find my packages at
http://www.speakeasy.net/~itz/hacks/
in the files makepp-1.18*.
Thanks!
--
Ian Zimmerman, Oakland, California, U.S.A.
if (sizeof(signed) > sizeof(unsigned) + 4) { delete this; }
GPG: 433BA087 9C0F 194F 203A 63F7 B1B8 6E5A 8CA3 27DB 433B A087
Re: Unofficial package tips
Bastian Kleineidam wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 08:19:51PM +0100, Henning Moll wrote:
> > In addition i have some questions to the Depends section in
> > debian/control: ${shlibs:Depends} is a nice feature, but i think
> > for many packages/libraries it is way to strict, because it's
> > always using the versions of installed packages which may not be
> > necessary. So what's the best/common way to handle this?
>
> The library version number is there for some reason: binary compatibility.
> If you drop the version number from library depends, your package may
> break when a new library is there.
I think you meant when an old library is there, not an new one. Since
libraries are not meant to be forward compatible moving code compiled
with a newer library to an older one might not work. The older one
did not know about the newer one. They are designed to be backward
compatible in that moving to a newer library should work. The newer
one knows about the older one. Assuming that is what you meant or
please correct me.
Bob
pgpNhXG9ks4T3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Steve Kemp wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 06:08:23PM +0100, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > > BTW never forget that external archive can be as dangerous as usefull. > > Warn ALWAYS the user that is not an official repository and don't use it > > only for your own "glory".. help the official maintainer with what it will > > come out of its usage. > > Glory is an interesting choice of word. I choose it carefully to underline what the Social Contract states: "Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software" basically (atleast in my specific case) when i started debian-ipv6 archive i did with a specific purpoues to give people something more, exactly like you do. But personally i do not care of getting "credits" for it. I am much more glad to share the credits inside the team since it is a work done by several people and developers (as you can read by my signature of which I am extremely proud :-) ). > Surely this is a win win situation for everybody? Any glory is really > going to upstream (OK me in my case) for writing the code > which others want, not to the packager, or maintainer of the debs. I agree with you. my concern is that sometimes people do not see that far inside what they have. not blaming anyone here but look at X for example. I did never see someone on irc saying: "hey cool they released X4.3 ... great job they did" but only things like: "hey Branden X4.3 is out when will you package it?". Probably we often forget that we are "only" (well me not yet :-) ) a layer between the upstream and the user. > I guess the only tricky part is knowing when a package is sufficiently > popular that it should go into Debian for real. I've not reached > that point with any of my little .debs, but I can imagine others > have. IMHO even the smallest bit is important. probably we are lacking a way to understand how users make use of that bit and understand how mush usefull is or not... -- drac (1.11-7) unstable; urgency=low * added IPv6 patch from the great IPv6 Team -- Noel Koethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:33:00 +0100
Re: Unofficial package tips
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Fre, 2003-02-28 at 18:08, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote: > > > > I would also add something about dependencies. Be sure to build always > > againt the main debian archive and in the worst case with pkgs that are in > > your external archive of which you have control of. This should atleast > > ensure a lower risk of "fried" systems. Do not rely on thirdy part > > archives even for the smallest piece of software. > > I have found pbuilder to be a great way to avoid this as well as other > build time side effects. > pbuilder is great. as well as the flexibility of its configuration that permits to add as many sources as you want. i expect an expert users that is building its own archive perfectly capable of changing pbuilder config. -- drac (1.11-7) unstable; urgency=low * added IPv6 patch from the great IPv6 Team -- Noel Koethe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 9 Feb 2003 19:33:00 +0100
