From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: kerstin.jonsson@ericsson.com (kerstin.jonsson)
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 16:56:35 +0200
Subject: [ltt-dev] debian packaging
In-Reply-To: <20100519152324.GA9856@shaniqua>
References: <4BF39A6B.7000904@ericsson.com> <20100519152324.GA9856@shaniqua>
Message-ID: <4BF54DA3.1090500@ericsson.com>

On 05/19/2010 05:23 PM, Jon Bernard wrote:
> * kerstin.jonsson<kerstin.jonsson at ericsson.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have added a "deb" target to the ust and lttv make files, to
>> enable build of debian packages, I also did some minor changes to
>> the documentation - NB! not the contents, only to enable deb install
>> of the manual as info pages.
>>
>> This is something that I did only for our own convenience, (i.e. the
>> debian control files needs more work before these patches can be
>> made public) we are using pbuilder to create boot images for
>> different targets and then it's neat to have everything installable
>> from deb packets.
>>
>> Is this something that may be of interest? I'd be happy to mail the
>> patches. Or is the intention to keep the packaging separate from the
>> source tree?
>>      
> Hi Kerstin, thanks for your interest! I'm more than happy to collaborate
> on the debian packaging.
>
>    
Hi Bernard,

I'm afraid that I don't have much of value to contribute. I'll try to 
explain why (in few words;D)

Nils and I have a setup where we use separate machines for building and 
testing,
we try to automate the process of creating boot images for different 
target machines
as far as possible. If you look at the problem from that angle you may 
easier understand
why we find it very convenient to have the packaging tools included in 
the source tree.
We fully understand (and respect), however, your reasons for wanting to 
keep the packaging separate.

The reason I suspect you may not find anything useful in my series of 
patches
(which I will force upon you anyway) is that I focused only on creating 
usable and installable
.deb packets, and didn't pay any attention whatsoever to formalities in 
debian packet control files.
As I saw it, the easiest way of doing the packaging in-tree was to base 
the packaging on the tar archive
produced by the make distcheck target - so this is what I did.

The distcheck target, however, would not build cleanly so I had to do 
some minor modifications
to the automake system to fix that.
As Nils an I are beginners we found it useful to have the manual 
installed as info pages on our
target machines - some additional changes to the make system + info 
install tags added to
the texinfo was needed to achieve that.

Then I created a set of truly rudimentary debian control files and just 
added a deb target to
the top Makefile.am.

I did this for ust as well as for lttv, how do you prefer having the 
patches, inline or attached?

Best Regards,
Kerstin


> I much prefer to keep the debian packaging development separate from
> upstream development. The git repositories for this are hosted at
> http://git.debian.org/ Ust and liburcu are available in Debian unstable
> and testing, but if you need packages for lenny, let me know. I should
> be able to backport them with little effort.
>
>    
Hi Bernard,


> ltt-control is nearly done, I have a manpage or two to write and it will
> be ready for upload. I can push a snapshot of this effort to a git
> repository if you're interested.
>
> For lttv, I'm only waiting for the licensing to be updated before I can
> upload that package.
>
> Any patches you have please send them along and I'll make sure they get
> included.
>
> Cheers
>
>