To All,
For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World now supports Android Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Alex,
Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson
________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" <Inkscape-devel@...2164...e.net> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far: * Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
* Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
1. We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
2. You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
3. You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because this *is* an upstream package.
4. You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient version
5. You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete version
6. debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
7. debian/control dependency changes that I made have been blanket-reverted
8. debian/control now introduces a patch system
9. I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
10. debian/rules now reintroduces patching
* Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week - I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Hi Everyone,
I've gone ahead and disabled both PPAs and their published packages. Once we've gotten this straightened out, we'll bring them back online. At this time I would personally feel more comfortable if on bringing them back up that Alex is the one to handle this. I mainly say it because he was the one to get the trunk builds up and running very quickly and he is one of the people who handle our packaging for Ubuntu (the most active individual if I'm not mistaken).
Leo, if you follow Alex's advice and really think you've got it worked out in your own PPA first, we'll just have Alex do a once over to see if it's okay via the packaging policies (and the build recipe). I'm not trying to discourage you and he wasn't looking to either, we just have 1 real rule in the project... don't publicly commit broken stuff under the banner of "official Inkscape". :) It does occasionally happen, no doubt. I think almost everyone has committed something broken (for a different platform usually) or missing a piece at least once (again, a lot of time relating to a different platform). So please know, you're still good and your efforts are appreciated.
Cheers, Josh
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> wrote:
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far:
- Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big
problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
- Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging
code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
- We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of
Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
- You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This
means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
- You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because
this *is* an upstream package.
You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient version
You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete version
debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
debian/control dependency changes that I made have been blanket-reverted
debian/control now introduces a patch system
I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts
on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
- debian/rules now reintroduces patching
- Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high
version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week
- I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Josh,
No problem I did use the recipes from these.... lp:~valavanisalex/maverick-backports/fix-844697 lp:~valavanisalex/lucid-backports/fix-844697 lp:ubuntu/lucid-backports/inkscape lp:ubuntu/maverick-backports/inkscape
The changes that you mention are not all mine. It is due to the way backport is. I know I made a mistake maybe if possible when Alex gets back he can mentor me. So I can help him with the packages.
I do understand about the names, and I am sorry about that.
Regards, Leo Jackson
________________________________ From: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> To: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> Cc: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...>; "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:32 AM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Everyone,
I've gone ahead and disabled both PPAs and their published packages. Once we've gotten this straightened out, we'll bring them back online. At this time I would personally feel more comfortable if on bringing them back up that Alex is the one to handle this. I mainly say it because he was the one to get the trunk builds up and running very quickly and he is one of the people who handle our packaging for Ubuntu (the most active individual if I'm not mistaken).
Leo, if you follow Alex's advice and really think you've got it worked out in your own PPA first, we'll just have Alex do a once over to see if it's okay via the packaging policies (and the build recipe). I'm not trying to discourage you and he wasn't looking to either, we just have 1 real rule in the project... don't publicly commit broken stuff under the banner of "official Inkscape". :) It does occasionally happen, no doubt. I think almost everyone has committed something broken (for a different platform usually) or missing a piece at least once (again, a lot of time relating to a different platform). So please know, you're still good and your efforts are appreciated.
Cheers, Josh
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> wrote:
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far:
- Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big
problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
- Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging
code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
- We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of
Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
- You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This
means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
- You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because
this *is* an upstream package.
You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient version
You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete version
debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
debian/control dependency changes that I made have been blanket-reverted
debian/control now introduces a patch system
I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts
on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
- debian/rules now reintroduces patching
- Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high
version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week
- I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Hi Leo,
Those are all branches of the official (downsteam) Ubuntu package. The recipe for automatically building upstream packages is just a very simple three-line bzr script, which can be found at https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/+recipe/inkscape-trunk-daily
It just merges the packaging code from lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging into the Inkscape source and then builds and uploads each day. The recipe also automatically sets the version of the packages.
All that was needed to fix the trunk package builds in Maverick/Lucid was to remove the versions of libwpg and libwpd in debian/control... nothing else! After doing this (and switching on the builds in the recipe control panel), the recipe will just start deploying the builds each day... there's no need to ever manually upload packages to the PPA.
For the stable repository, it's just a case of creating a new recipe that * uses lp:inkscape/0.48.x instead of lp:inkscape * uses a sensible versioning scheme * pushes to the stable PPA instead of trunk We'd also need to make a new branch of the packaging code with one very small change... name the package "inkscape" or "inkscape-stable" instead of "inkscape-trunk".
Next week, I'll quite happily document the changes I make to fix the PPAs so that you'll know for next time.
AV
On 30 October 2011 20:51, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Josh, No problem I did use the recipes from these.... lp:~valavanisalex/maverick-backports/fix-844697 lp:~valavanisalex/lucid-backports/fix-844697 lp:ubuntu/lucid-backports/inkscape lp:ubuntu/maverick-backports/inkscape
The changes that you mention are not all mine. It is due to the way backport is. I know I made a mistake maybe if possible when Alex gets back he can mentor me. So I can help him with the packages.
I do understand about the names, and I am sorry about that.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> To: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> Cc: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...>; "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:32 AM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Everyone,
I've gone ahead and disabled both PPAs and their published packages. Once we've gotten this straightened out, we'll bring them back online. At this time I would personally feel more comfortable if on bringing them back up that Alex is the one to handle this. I mainly say it because he was the one to get the trunk builds up and running very quickly and he is one of the people who handle our packaging for Ubuntu (the most active individual if I'm not mistaken).
Leo, if you follow Alex's advice and really think you've got it worked out in your own PPA first, we'll just have Alex do a once over to see if it's okay via the packaging policies (and the build recipe). I'm not trying to discourage you and he wasn't looking to either, we just have 1 real rule in the project... don't publicly commit broken stuff under the banner of "official Inkscape". :) It does occasionally happen, no doubt. I think almost everyone has committed something broken (for a different platform usually) or missing a piece at least once (again, a lot of time relating to a different platform). So please know, you're still good and your efforts are appreciated.
Cheers, Josh
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> wrote:
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far:
- Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big
problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
- Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging
code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
- We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of
Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
- You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This
means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
- You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because
this *is* an upstream package.
- You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient
version
- You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete
version
debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
debian/control dependency changes that I made have been
blanket-reverted
debian/control now introduces a patch system
I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts
on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
- debian/rules now reintroduces patching
- Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high
version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week
- I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Alex,
Thank you that is better and easier than I thought. I seen backport in bugs https://bugs.launchpad.net/lucid-backports/+bug/844697
And because it didn't build on my system I used those and it worked under my host system. Maverik built fine and Lucid did as well.
When I changed the dh_translation etc. I have built packages before on my PPA for other programs more than just the two in there. and I didn't seem to have a problem.
I will do what you said ASAP and test in my PPA.
Regards, Leo Jackson
________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>; ""Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:11 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Leo,
Those are all branches of the official (downsteam) Ubuntu package. The recipe for automatically building upstream packages is just a very simple three-line bzr script, which can be found at https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/+recipe/inkscape-trunk-daily
It just merges the packaging code from lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging into the Inkscape source and then builds and uploads each day. The recipe also automatically sets the version of the packages.
All that was needed to fix the trunk package builds in Maverick/Lucid was to remove the versions of libwpg and libwpd in debian/control... nothing else! After doing this (and switching on the builds in the recipe control panel), the recipe will just start deploying the builds each day... there's no need to ever manually upload packages to the PPA.
For the stable repository, it's just a case of creating a new recipe that * uses lp:inkscape/0.48.x instead of lp:inkscape * uses a sensible versioning scheme * pushes to the stable PPA instead of trunk We'd also need to make a new branch of the packaging code with one very small change... name the package "inkscape" or "inkscape-stable" instead of "inkscape-trunk".
Next week, I'll quite happily document the changes I make to fix the PPAs so that you'll know for next time.
AV
On 30 October 2011 20:51, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Josh, No problem I did use the recipes from these.... lp:~valavanisalex/maverick-backports/fix-844697 lp:~valavanisalex/lucid-backports/fix-844697 lp:ubuntu/lucid-backports/inkscape lp:ubuntu/maverick-backports/inkscape
The changes that you mention are not all mine. It is due to the way backport is. I know I made a mistake maybe if possible when Alex gets back he can mentor me. So I can help him with the packages.
I do understand about the names, and I am sorry about that.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> To: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> Cc: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...>; "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:32 AM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Everyone,
I've gone ahead and disabled both PPAs and their published packages. Once we've gotten this straightened out, we'll bring them back online. At this time I would personally feel more comfortable if on bringing them back up that Alex is the one to handle this. I mainly say it because he was the one to get the trunk builds up and running very quickly and he is one of the people who handle our packaging for Ubuntu (the most active individual if I'm not mistaken).
Leo, if you follow Alex's advice and really think you've got it worked out in your own PPA first, we'll just have Alex do a once over to see if it's okay via the packaging policies (and the build recipe). I'm not trying to discourage you and he wasn't looking to either, we just have 1 real rule in the project... don't publicly commit broken stuff under the banner of "official Inkscape". :) It does occasionally happen, no doubt. I think almost everyone has committed something broken (for a different platform usually) or missing a piece at least once (again, a lot of time relating to a different platform). So please know, you're still good and your efforts are appreciated.
Cheers, Josh
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> wrote:
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far:
- Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big
problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
- Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging
code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
- We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of
Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
- You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This
means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
- You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because
this *is* an upstream package.
- You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient
version
- You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete
version
debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
debian/control dependency changes that I made have been
blanket-reverted
debian/control now introduces a patch system
I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts
on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
- debian/rules now reintroduces patching
- Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high
version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week
- I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Hi Leo,
Those bugs again refer to the official Ubuntu package. The main differences are that
* Official Ubuntu packages are inherited from Debian, so we try not to change too much of the Debian maintainer's (ancient) packaging code just so that it's easier to manage Ubuntu/Debian synchronisation. For the native, upstream packages, we don't have that restriction so I updated a lot of the packaging code to use newer standards.
* The official Ubuntu packages contain patches that were backported from Inkscape trunk so that Ubuntu users can get some early bug-fixes. For the upstream packages, we should keep them patch-free so that the user really is getting the "true" version of Inkscape.
* Ubuntu includes Inkscape in its "main" repository, meaning that it can be distributed on the official installation DVD (among other things). To save space, all main packages use the dh_translations, which strips out a lot of the translations from the package and puts it in language packs instead. For the upstream package, we shouldn't do this... we want to provide translations in the package itself.
Hope that helps to explain why the packaging code is so different.
AV
On 30 October 2011 21:28, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex,
Thank you that is better and easier than I thought. I seen backport in bugs https://bugs.launchpad.net/lucid-backports/+bug/844697
And because it didn't build on my system I used those and it worked under my host system. Maverik built fine and Lucid did as well.
When I changed the dh_translation etc. I have built packages before on my PPA for other programs more than just the two in there. and I didn't seem to have a problem.
I will do what you said ASAP and test in my PPA.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>; ""Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:11 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Leo,
Those are all branches of the official (downsteam) Ubuntu package. The recipe for automatically building upstream packages is just a very simple three-line bzr script, which can be found at https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/+recipe/inkscape-trunk-daily
It just merges the packaging code from lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging into the Inkscape source and then builds and uploads each day. The recipe also automatically sets the version of the packages.
All that was needed to fix the trunk package builds in Maverick/Lucid was to remove the versions of libwpg and libwpd in debian/control... nothing else! After doing this (and switching on the builds in the recipe control panel), the recipe will just start deploying the builds each day... there's no need to ever manually upload packages to the PPA.
For the stable repository, it's just a case of creating a new recipe that
- uses lp:inkscape/0.48.x instead of lp:inkscape
- uses a sensible versioning scheme
- pushes to the stable PPA instead of trunk
We'd also need to make a new branch of the packaging code with one very small change... name the package "inkscape" or "inkscape-stable" instead of "inkscape-trunk".
Next week, I'll quite happily document the changes I make to fix the PPAs so that you'll know for next time.
AV
On 30 October 2011 20:51, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Josh, No problem I did use the recipes from these.... lp:~valavanisalex/maverick-backports/fix-844697 lp:~valavanisalex/lucid-backports/fix-844697 lp:ubuntu/lucid-backports/inkscape lp:ubuntu/maverick-backports/inkscape
The changes that you mention are not all mine. It is due to the way backport is. I know I made a mistake maybe if possible when Alex gets back he can mentor me. So I can help him with the packages.
I do understand about the names, and I am sorry about that.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> To: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> Cc: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...>; "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:32 AM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Everyone,
I've gone ahead and disabled both PPAs and their published packages. Once we've gotten this straightened out, we'll bring them back online. At this time I would personally feel more comfortable if on bringing them back up that Alex is the one to handle this. I mainly say it because he was the one to get the trunk builds up and running very quickly and he is one of the people who handle our packaging for Ubuntu (the most active individual if I'm not mistaken).
Leo, if you follow Alex's advice and really think you've got it worked out in your own PPA first, we'll just have Alex do a once over to see if it's okay via the packaging policies (and the build recipe). I'm not trying to discourage you and he wasn't looking to either, we just have 1 real rule in the project... don't publicly commit broken stuff under the banner of "official Inkscape". :) It does occasionally happen, no doubt. I think almost everyone has committed something broken (for a different platform usually) or missing a piece at least once (again, a lot of time relating to a different platform). So please know, you're still good and your efforts are appreciated.
Cheers, Josh
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> wrote:
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far:
- Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big
problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
- Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging
code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
- We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of
Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
- You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This
means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
- You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because
this *is* an upstream package.
- You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient
version
- You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete
version
debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
debian/control dependency changes that I made have been
blanket-reverted
debian/control now introduces a patch system
I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts
on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
- debian/rules now reintroduces patching
- Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high
version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week
- I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Alex,
Yes I understand a bit more on this now. Thank you for all the help I will fix my mistakes. And try in my PPA first on a run...
Regards, Leo Jackson
________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>; """Inkscape-devel@...1796...t""" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:38 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Leo,
Those bugs again refer to the official Ubuntu package. The main differences are that
* Official Ubuntu packages are inherited from Debian, so we try not to change too much of the Debian maintainer's (ancient) packaging code just so that it's easier to manage Ubuntu/Debian synchronisation. For the native, upstream packages, we don't have that restriction so I updated a lot of the packaging code to use newer standards.
* The official Ubuntu packages contain patches that were backported from Inkscape trunk so that Ubuntu users can get some early bug-fixes. For the upstream packages, we should keep them patch-free so that the user really is getting the "true" version of Inkscape.
* Ubuntu includes Inkscape in its "main" repository, meaning that it can be distributed on the official installation DVD (among other things). To save space, all main packages use the dh_translations, which strips out a lot of the translations from the package and puts it in language packs instead. For the upstream package, we shouldn't do this... we want to provide translations in the package itself.
Hope that helps to explain why the packaging code is so different.
AV
On 30 October 2011 21:28, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex,
Thank you that is better and easier than I thought. I seen backport in bugs https://bugs.launchpad.net/lucid-backports/+bug/844697
And because it didn't build on my system I used those and it worked under my host system. Maverik built fine and Lucid did as well.
When I changed the dh_translation etc. I have built packages before on my PPA for other programs more than just the two in there. and I didn't seem to have a problem.
I will do what you said ASAP and test in my PPA.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>; ""Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:11 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Leo,
Those are all branches of the official (downsteam) Ubuntu package. The recipe for automatically building upstream packages is just a very simple three-line bzr script, which can be found at https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/+recipe/inkscape-trunk-daily
It just merges the packaging code from lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging into the Inkscape source and then builds and uploads each day. The recipe also automatically sets the version of the packages.
All that was needed to fix the trunk package builds in Maverick/Lucid was to remove the versions of libwpg and libwpd in debian/control... nothing else! After doing this (and switching on the builds in the recipe control panel), the recipe will just start deploying the builds each day... there's no need to ever manually upload packages to the PPA.
For the stable repository, it's just a case of creating a new recipe that
- uses lp:inkscape/0.48.x instead of lp:inkscape
- uses a sensible versioning scheme
- pushes to the stable PPA instead of trunk
We'd also need to make a new branch of the packaging code with one very small change... name the package "inkscape" or "inkscape-stable" instead of "inkscape-trunk".
Next week, I'll quite happily document the changes I make to fix the PPAs so that you'll know for next time.
AV
On 30 October 2011 20:51, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Josh, No problem I did use the recipes from these.... lp:~valavanisalex/maverick-backports/fix-844697 lp:~valavanisalex/lucid-backports/fix-844697 lp:ubuntu/lucid-backports/inkscape lp:ubuntu/maverick-backports/inkscape
The changes that you mention are not all mine. It is due to the way backport is. I know I made a mistake maybe if possible when Alex gets back he can mentor me. So I can help him with the packages.
I do understand about the names, and I am sorry about that.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> To: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> Cc: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...>; "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:32 AM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
Hi Everyone,
I've gone ahead and disabled both PPAs and their published packages. Once we've gotten this straightened out, we'll bring them back online. At this time I would personally feel more comfortable if on bringing them back up that Alex is the one to handle this. I mainly say it because he was the one to get the trunk builds up and running very quickly and he is one of the people who handle our packaging for Ubuntu (the most active individual if I'm not mistaken).
Leo, if you follow Alex's advice and really think you've got it worked out in your own PPA first, we'll just have Alex do a once over to see if it's okay via the packaging policies (and the build recipe). I'm not trying to discourage you and he wasn't looking to either, we just have 1 real rule in the project... don't publicly commit broken stuff under the banner of "official Inkscape". :) It does occasionally happen, no doubt. I think almost everyone has committed something broken (for a different platform usually) or missing a piece at least once (again, a lot of time relating to a different platform). So please know, you're still good and your efforts are appreciated.
Cheers, Josh
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> wrote:
Hi Leo,
Thanks for all your work on this, but you are introducing quite a lot of major errors in both the trunk and the stable PPAs. Both of these PPAs are publicly visible and are "official" Inkscape project builds, so any mistakes go live immediately and can potentially break inkscape on many users' machines. I'd suggest testing things thoroughly in your own PPA before committing changes to the ~inkscape.dev repositories.
The main issues so far:
- Package naming: You need to follow the Debian policy, otherwise big
problems can arise... versions like "0.48.2-stable" do not conform to standards, and will break the upgrade cycle. At best, the packages will fail to upload
- Rather than making the small change I suggested to the packaging
code, you have completely overwritten the entire branch using the packaging from the official Ubuntu repositories. This introduces some major errors...
- We're supposed to be supplying a clean (native) package of
Inkscape. You deleted the source/format file, meaning that the build system does not know this.
- You have included some patches that I backported to Ubuntu. This
means that (a) the package is no longer a "clean" inkscape 0.48.2, (b) build failures will occur in Inkscape trunk, and (c) the source package is no longer native.
- You have added an upstream "watch" file. This is an error, because
this *is* an upstream package.
- You have downgraded the debhelper compatibility level to an ancient
version
- You have replaced the "README.source" file with an old, incomplete
version
debian/control has an ancient Standards-Version
debian/control dependency changes that I made have been
blanket-reverted
debian/control now introduces a patch system
I introduced the "inkscape-trunk" package name to prevent conflicts
on user systems and allow easy switching between stable and unstable installations
- debian/rules now reintroduces patching
- Finally, by manually uploading a broken package with a high
version-number to inkscape-trunk, all subsequent builds in Ubuntu Natty are failing. We'll need to manually remove this before any other version can automatically build.
Sorry to sound so negative... I appreciate all your hard work, but I think that you take a break, study the Debian policy manual and packaging guide carefully and attempt to build all packages firstly on your own machine, and then in your own PPA. Finally, if you want to introduce any big changes to the packaging code, please push them to a new branch and ask for review rather than pushing them straight to the live code.
I can take a look at fixing the broken builds/packaging code next week
- I'm away on business at the moment, so I don't have time right now.
Thanks,
Alex
On 30 October 2011 01:25, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
Alex, Yes I seen I just didn't want it not to build.
Regards, Leo Jackson ________________________________ From: Alex Valavanis <valavanisalex@...400...> To: Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> Cc: "Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] The Maverik and Lucid builds
As far as I remember, it's an easy fix. Just get rid of the versioning on the libwp* dependencies in debian/control. Push these changes to lp:~inkscape.dev/inkscape/debian-packaging and it should be fine in all Ubuntu versions.
On 30 October 2011 00:02, Leo Jackson <lajjr@...36...> wrote:
To All, For the Maverik and Lucid builds I will have to look into the backports for changes will take a bit to set up. I will have them shortly just want them to build the first shot.
Regards, Leo Jackson
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
participants (3)
-
Alex Valavanis -
Josh Andler -
Leo Jackson