What about starting to use project-builder for native packages?

Gunnar Wrobel wrobel at pardus.de
Wed Apr 14 23:34:02 CEST 2010

Quoting Richard Bos <ml at radoeka.nl>:

> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:47:57PM +0200, Gunnar Wrobel wrote:
>> Hi (especially to the native packagers),
>> would it be okay to start building (or at least to start trying to
>> build) packages via project-builder (http://trac.project-builder.org/)?
>> I looked a little bit closer at the tool at the end of last week and I
>> got the impression that this would serve us well. I admit this was not
>> yet an in-depth check but at the moment I'm pretty convinced it should
>> allow us to create simple packages for several distributions at the same
>> time.
>> Mathieu suggested using this tool a while ago. Richard suggested using
>> the OpenSUSE build system. While I like that system it does not deliver
>> packages for a specific distribution that is (still) critical to the
>> Kolab server: OpenPKG. project-builder is probably slightly more
>> complicated but it also is somewhat more flexible.
> It seems possible to have an openpkg target at the openSUSE Build  
> Service (OBS):
> http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2010-04/msg00117.html
> Would it be possible to provide Adrian S. (OBS maintainer / developer)
> with openpkg packages that are needed to e.g build the PEAR packages?
> I still see problems that are to be solved, like e.g the specific
> openpkg spec file.  But all of this might be solvable....

Maybe I shouldn't have cited the lack of OpenPKG support as the only  
reason why I'm not certain that we should rely on the OpenSUSE build  
service. In theory project-builder does not limit us in any way  
concerning the distributions we build packages for. So it could also  
be pkgsrc or Gentoo. And these ones would definitely be hard to get on  
the OpenSUSE build service.

Nevertheless the likelihood that we have an interest in supporting  
these less widespread distros is not too high. So this argument is not  
that important.

Another reason for preojectbuilder might be that we do not want to  
fully rely on an external build service. I consider it important that  
we are always able to build our own packages.

The fact that it currently has no OpenPKG support also means we would  
have to wait a while until we can fully use it.

Anyhow: You made it clear that you'd still rather like to go the  
OpenSUSE build service route. And I think it has the advantage of  
being an easy solution.

But when I reconsidered the build service I thought we might also  
simply use both. As far as I understand it we only need decent spec  
files for the build service. Plus the source package. Is that right?  
Both are things that are being delivered by project builder. So it  
might be rather easy to do the basic template definition in the  
project builder and only generate the source package and the spec for  
the subsequent build service step. For all distros not supported by  
the build service we could fully build the packages.

Do you think that might work?



> --
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> Kolab-users mailing list
> Kolab-users at kolab.org
> https://kolab.org/mailman/listinfo/kolab-users

______ http://kdab.com _______________ http://kolab-konsortium.com _

p at rdus Kolab work is funded in part by KDAB and the Kolab Konsortium

____ http://www.pardus.de _________________ http://gunnarwrobel.de _
E-mail : p at rdus.de                                 Dr. Gunnar Wrobel
Tel.   : +49 700 6245 0000                          Bundesstrasse 29
Fax    : +49 721 1513 52322                          D-20146 Hamburg
    >> Mail at ease - Rent a kolab groupware server at p at rdus <<

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digitale PGP-Unterschrift
URL: <http://lists.kolab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100414/8adf758d/attachment.sig>

More information about the users mailing list