[cl-debian] Re: sbcl_0.8.20.5-2_i386.changes ACCEPTED
Debian Installer wrote:
Accepted: sbcl-common_0.8.20.5-2_all.deb to pool/main/s/sbcl/sbcl-common_0.8.20.5-2_all.deb sbcl_0.8.20.5-2.diff.gz to pool/main/s/sbcl/sbcl_0.8.20.5-2.diff.gz sbcl_0.8.20.5-2.dsc to pool/main/s/sbcl/sbcl_0.8.20.5-2.dsc sbcl_0.8.20.5-2_i386.deb to pool/main/s/sbcl/sbcl_0.8.20.5-2_i386.deb Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org
Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
The new sbcl got into unstable, the extra people for ftp duty seem to help :-). I think I will need to work with UCW in the near future, I guess nobody packaged it (or some other package) yet? Groetjes, Peter
Hi Peter! On Fri 25 Mar 2005 07:46 +0100, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
I think I will need to work with UCW in the near future, I guess nobody packaged it (or some other package) yet?
Just wait, Peter, I'm working on it ;-) Actually, I already prepared the 'background' packages (like arnesi, FiveAM and yaclml), but I haven't had time to public my arch repositories yet. Anyway, I've some questions I'm going to post here, but not now (lacking time...). Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
Hi all! On Tue 29 Mar 2005 14:23 +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
Actually, I already prepared the 'background' packages (like arnesi, FiveAM and yaclml), but I haven't had time to public my arch repositories yet.
Anyway, I've some questions I'm going to post here, but not now (lacking time...).
Ok, here the /problems/ I'm encountering... UCW requires some external 'libraries': 1) arnesi (http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/arnesi.html), already debianized, at least for the CL sources. I'm trying to solve the -doc package creation with Marco Baringer, but this is a minor issue. 2) yaclml (http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/yaclml.html), already debianized, but the installation depends on another Marco's tool, FiveAM (http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/FiveAM.html), which I debianized ;-) 3) iterate, already present in Debian (Peter is the maintainer), but I should check the differences between the Debian version and the UCW one. 4) mod_lisp, which is the Debian libapache-mod-lisp (maintained by Matthew Danish), but with some differencies. Instead of mod_lisp, you could use araneida, so we should also package it ;-) 5) rfc2388 (http://common-lisp.net/project/rfc2388/), but I cannot find any way to download a release to be debianized :-( 6) SLIME, which should enter Debian soon, even if I haven't heard news about it for a while. 7) portableaserve, already present in Debian (maintained by Peter); instead of this, one could use AllegroServe, which hasn't been packaged for Debian yet. 8) apache :-D Once all these packages will be available on Debian official, packaging UCW should be so simple! Specifically to the first 2 libraries (and even for the future UCW), Marco agreed to make them Debian native packages. I imported them into my arch repository and I'm ready to publish it, but I've a question regarding the debian/changelog: ATM, it contains an entry (when I debianized the package), but if someone download today's arch and create a Debian package from it, the version will be the same as my first debianized package. I don't know if tla-buildpackage takes care of this or not and so I don't know how should I update the debian/changelog. Suggestions? Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
Luca Capello wrote:
5) rfc2388 (http://common-lisp.net/project/rfc2388/), but I cannot find any way to download a release to be debianized :-(
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/?cvsroot=rfc2388 has a 'download tarball' :-)
6) SLIME, which should enter Debian soon, even if I haven't heard news about it for a while.
Nor have I.
7) portableaserve, already present in Debian (maintained by Peter); instead of this, one could use AllegroServe, which hasn't been packaged for Debian yet.
Why? AllegroServe is only for acl. Please note that the acl and lw installers and openmcl are still orphaned: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?which=submitter&data=kmr%40debian.org&archive=no
Specifically to the first 2 libraries (and even for the future UCW), Marco agreed to make them Debian native packages. I imported them into my arch repository and I'm ready to publish it, but I've a question regarding the debian/changelog: ATM, it contains an entry (when I debianized the package), but if someone download today's arch and create a Debian package from it, the version will be the same as my first debianized package. I don't know if tla-buildpackage takes care of this or not and so I don't know how should I update the debian/changelog.
As far as I know if you do a 'apt-get source sbcl' you also build the exact same version as the one in the repository. I do not think there is an easy way to prevent people from building a package with an old version number and newer sources. In the new sbcl package I use a script to create a new version based on the version string of the sources themselves, but even that is not in the main debian/rules file so will not get executed automaticly. Groetjes, Peter
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 10:44:25AM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
Luca Capello wrote:
5) rfc2388 (http://common-lisp.net/project/rfc2388/), but I cannot find any way to download a release to be debianized :-(
http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/?cvsroot=rfc2388 has a 'download tarball' :-)
6) SLIME, which should enter Debian soon, even if I haven't heard news about it for a while.
Nor have I.
7) portableaserve, already present in Debian (maintained by Peter); instead of this, one could use AllegroServe, which hasn't been packaged for Debian yet.
Why? AllegroServe is only for acl. Please note that the acl and lw installers and openmcl are still orphaned: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?which=submitter&data=kmr%40debian.org&archive=no
Ah, you didn't grab OpenMCL? Darn, i thought i could flood your inbox with bugreports and patches ;-/ I have 0.14.3 (latest release and bleeding CVS) debianized - but there are some serious bugs in the installation routine (basically the installation of the common lisp controller picks the wrong core file and the core of the created image uses the old version of OpenMCL). I'm working on a better install/setup - where would i send my patches?
Specifically to the first 2 libraries (and even for the future UCW), Marco agreed to make them Debian native packages. I imported them into my arch repository and I'm ready to publish it, but I've a question regarding the debian/changelog: ATM, it contains an entry (when I debianized the package), but if someone download today's arch and create a Debian package from it, the version will be the same as my first debianized package. I don't know if tla-buildpackage takes care of this or not and so I don't know how should I update the debian/changelog.
As far as I know if you do a 'apt-get source sbcl' you also build the exact same version as the one in the repository. I do not think there is an easy way to prevent people from building a package with an old version number and newer sources.
Hmm, the version number of the package is extracted from the changelog, isn't it?
In the new sbcl package I use a script to create a new version based on the version string of the sources themselves, but even that is not in the main debian/rules file so will not get executed automaticly.
Hmm, what exactly does the script do? Read the upstream version and create a new changelog entry? Greetings RalfD
Groetjes, Peter _______________________________________________ cl-debian mailing list cl-debian@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cl-debian
rm@fabula.de wrote:
Ah, you didn't grab OpenMCL? Darn, i thought i could flood your inbox with bugreports and patches ;-/
If someone would offer me a nice Mac I could consider it :-).
I have 0.14.3 (latest release and bleeding CVS) debianized - but there are some serious bugs in the installation routine (basically the installation of the common lisp controller picks the wrong core file and the core of the created image uses the old version of OpenMCL). I'm working on a better install/setup - where would i send my patches?
In theory the QA group, in practice: nominate yourself as maintainer and send me the files to sign and upload. ...
Hmm, the version number of the package is extracted from the changelog, isn't it?
Correct.
In the new sbcl package I use a script to create a new version based on the version string of the sources themselves, but even that is not in the main debian/rules file so will not get executed automaticly.
Hmm, what exactly does the script do? Read the upstream version and create a new changelog entry?
Admire the horror: VISUAL=nvi EDITOR=nvi dch --newversion "1:$(grep -v '^;' version.lisp-expr | sed 's/"//g')-1" --preserve Groetjes, Peter
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 08:10:01PM +0200, Peter Van Eynde wrote:
rm@fabula.de wrote:
Ah, you didn't grab OpenMCL? Darn, i thought i could flood your inbox with bugreports and patches ;-/
If someone would offer me a nice Mac I could consider it :-).
Sorry, i still need mine (and it's getting old, sigh)
I have 0.14.3 (latest release and bleeding CVS) debianized - but there are some serious bugs in the installation routine (basically the installation of the common lisp controller picks the wrong core file and the core of the created image uses the old version of OpenMCL). I'm working on a better install/setup - where would i send my patches?
In theory the QA group, in practice: nominate yourself as maintainer and send me the files to sign and upload.
What do i need to nominate myself as a maintainer? I'll try to prepare a new package (0.14.3 was just released) that includes more of the distribution (right now some rather essential parts are missing from the packaged version). Cheers RalfD
participants (4)
-
Luca Capello -
Peter Van Eynde -
Peter Van Eynde -
rm＠fabula.de