[M3devel] packages for AMD64-LINUX stable.

[Hendrik Boom]

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 09:17:34PM -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:29:16PM +0000, Jay K wrote:
> > 
> > I have not built the entire tree since that stuff came in.Oops.  
> 
> My saying this year seems to be "That which is not tested is broken".
> 
> > If the goal is to get some sort of .deb, to see what it is, to give it to someone else, do this:    cd scripts    rm PKGSDB    edit down pkginfo.txt     hm, oops, this stuff isn't in there?      The same information might be duplicated in pylib.py?   I think I fixed that..based on a quick read.       Maybe we pickup all m3makefiles? Maybe.    Just rm -rf from your tree anything that is giving you trouble now, as you've already built lots of stuff.     - Jay
> 
> That's the way to get ahead at this point, yes.

I now have packages 

cm3-all-AMD64_LINUX-d5.9.0-20120518.deb
cm3-all-AMD64_LINUX-d5.9.0-20120518.tar.gz
cm3-min-AMD64_LINUX-d5.9.0-20120518
cm3-min-AMD64_LINUX-d5.9.0-20120518.tar.gz

and a few huge directories under /tmp.  I presume those huge directories
contain the files that were archived into these packages and that I can 
discard them.  Have all the executables in them been shipped?  Or should 
I delete /usr/local/cm3 and install the package?

Is the verion number right?  And will debian's package mamager collate 
it becode, for example, cm3-all-AMD64_LINUX-5.9.0 when it finally comes 
out?  If not, the right version number for Debian is probably something 
like 5.9.0~20120518 instead of d5.9.0-20120518 (note the tilde).  I'll 
look at the version-numbering stuff in the packaging manual and see if I 
draw any conclusions, and whether the version number that's in the file 
name has any relevance to the one the package manager uses.
And the binary package just might have to contain the AMD64_LINUX 
information in another form.

And, of course, I'll have to do a test install, because that which is 
not tested is broken.

If I get these things sorted out, it's probably ready to make available 
as a package that works on current debian stable, though it'll be a lot 
more work to get it to conform to all the debian packaging 
rules.

Oh, yes, the package leaves out ESC.  My guess is that the package 
builder builds its modules in the wrong order, presumably because it 
needs some clues that should be present in the ESC source directories 
but isn't.  Anyone know what information find-packages.sh and pkginfo.sh 
need to do the job properly?  How do these nested program direcoties 
work, anyway?

-- hendrik

> 
> I will have to take a look at ESC sometime, though.  It looks like fun.  
> This is the stuff that processes all the mutex comments in Trestle, 
> right?
> 
> I really had thought it was long-lost code, never to be seen again.  Or 
> has someone started writing it anew?
> 
> -- hendrik