src2pkg 1.91.1

Post links to your 64bit module repos here. Repo maintainers are responsible for resolving any issues caused by their xzm's.
Post Reply
User avatar
phhpro
Full of knowledge
Full of knowledge
Posts: 545
Joined: 10 Nov 2013, 20:35
Distribution: .

src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#1 by phhpro » 13 Dec 2013, 04:14

...
Last edited by phhpro on 03 Feb 2016, 23:12, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
francois
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5116
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
Distribution: kde xfce porteus manjaro kubun
Location: Enfin l'été, le changement climatique attendu: le soleil.

Re: src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#2 by francois » 13 Dec 2013, 12:26

Hi Peter,

Do you work with that tool to build packages often?
Voltaire: Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

User avatar
phhpro
Full of knowledge
Full of knowledge
Posts: 545
Joined: 10 Nov 2013, 20:35
Distribution: .

Re: src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#3 by phhpro » 14 Dec 2013, 00:28

...
Last edited by phhpro on 03 Feb 2016, 23:12, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
francois
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5116
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
Distribution: kde xfce porteus manjaro kubun
Location: Enfin l'été, le changement climatique attendu: le soleil.

Re: src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#4 by francois » 14 Dec 2013, 01:47

We have been using gslapt and slapt-get on porteus at some point:
viewtopic.php?f=53&t=115

But after some discussions brokenman came in with PPM.
Voltaire: Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

User avatar
phhpro
Full of knowledge
Full of knowledge
Posts: 545
Joined: 10 Nov 2013, 20:35
Distribution: .

Re: src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#5 by phhpro » 14 Dec 2013, 03:54

...
Last edited by phhpro on 03 Feb 2016, 22:23, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
francois
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5116
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
Distribution: kde xfce porteus manjaro kubun
Location: Enfin l'été, le changement climatique attendu: le soleil.

Re: src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#6 by francois » 14 Dec 2013, 16:02

Please join us on development. I think Rava is interested by the discussion and brokenman should be there as soon as the maintainers will have went thru the establishment of version 3.0. You might have more critical and constructive approach to PPM than I could have. I am not very deep in terms of my understanding of the fundamentals of linux. But I am quite interested in package mangagement. See:
https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=2919

Concerning PPM problems with the dependencies. There is some is some provision for that type of problem. Brokenman should maybe clarify the topic, but from what I know each porteus package comes with a description which includes dependencies and conflicting packages. Basically I do not know how basically he resolves dependencies in the first place. However, the users should report missing dependencies and conflicts regurlarly under PPM bug reports, so that the maintainers could modify the packages descriptions accordingly:
https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=969

Users should be aware that they should troubleshoot in always fresh mode to be sure which package or library conflicts with which other package. Troubleshooting in always fresh mode is not a procedure that every user is aware of, especially naive users.

In addition, all packages should be built on the current repository as much as possible (presently 14.0, and for version 3.0 coming up 14.1). I imagine that it is difficult to measure the impact of personal packages on the system. However, when people are good enough to build their own packages from txz and dependencies or from source, they should be proficient enough to understand what impact it could have on the system. To be integrated to the databasePPM porteus modules adhere to strict building algorithm so to be stripped as much as possible to reduce their computer print (no docs, no redundancy, ...), see:
http://www.porteus.org/faq.html#twenty9

The porteus database of modules (xzm) is improving with time, but it is still small. That is why PPM proposes Slackware, Salix, Alien and Debian. However, if there are some dependencies problems related to porteus modules, from what I know there is few or no dependency resolution at all for those repositories. In addition, SBo that is intended to build from source does not function as well as expected. Is it due to some caveats or are we simply too dumb to use the tool. Would src2pkg be a better tool to build packages?

Maybe I should stop here. I imagine that intuitively you had come to these conclusions already. I hope my comprehension is not too far from reality. If not, i imagine that the maintainers will excuse me and come in to make some additional precision. Maybe we should move our discussion to the abovementioned thread:
https://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=2919
Voltaire: Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

User avatar
phhpro
Full of knowledge
Full of knowledge
Posts: 545
Joined: 10 Nov 2013, 20:35
Distribution: .

Re: src2pkg 1.91.1

Post#7 by phhpro » 14 Dec 2013, 21:31

...

Post Reply