Re: GSoC application deadline passed

[Philip Charles]

On Wednesday 19 March 2008, Michal Suchanek wrote:
> On 18/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> > Michal Suchanek, le Mon 17 Mar 2008 16:34:42 +0100, a écrit :
> > > On 17/03/2008, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> >  > > Arne Babenhauserheide, le Mon 17 Mar 2008 12:26:30 +0100, a 
écrit :
> >  > > > > As for automatically building live CDs and/or qemu images,
> >  > > > > this would be
> >  > > > >
> >  > >  > > very useful -- maybe that part is indeed an appropriate
> >  > >  > > task for GSoC. But as others pointed out, there are often
> >  > >  > > issues with building a working system that require manual
> >  > >  > > intervention; so it's questionable how far this process can
> >  > >  > > really be automated... I think this needs some more
> >  > >  > > consideration.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Maybe some people with more background knowledge could add
> >  > >  > their feedback there.
> >  > >  >
> >  > >  > Would it be possible to simplify the process _a lot_ with the
> >  > >  > right tools?
> >  > >
> >  > > The problem is that there is no easy automatic process: missing
> >  > >  dependencies have to be found in the archive, etc.
> >  >
> >  > What kind of archive? Shouldn't Debian just keep the packages
> >  > until new ones are built?
> >
> > Debian doesn't wait for non-official architectures to catch up.
>
> They do delete Hurd packages when there are no new ones to replace
> them? I can usually see different versions of packages for different
> architectures.
>
> >  > Can't there be a server with a Hurd repository that archives
> >  > enough of core packages to allow building a Hurd system out of
> >  > these?
> >
> > The problem is to determine automatically what has to be kept.
>
> Everything. There aren't that many packages for the Hurd. Plus keep
> all versions of packages on some "hurd-core" list until somebody
> manually marks a newer version as verified working.

Sorry to be rather late joining this thread.

A considerable amount of manual intervention is required to build the Hurd 
iso's.  Which version of a package?  Finding a replacement for a broken 
package.  Can we move from apt to aptitude?  And so on.  From the iso 
building pov the Debian GNU/Hurd archive is a mess - but at least the 
Debian archive exists.  debian-ports.org is vital, but it is not/cannot 
be integrated into the main archive.

The Hurd is bigger than most people realise, 17 CD iso's of packages that 
can in theory be installed, but most of them are rather useless.  
Something else the iso builder has to sort out.

My policy over the eight years I have been building the iso's has been to 
disturb the development process as little as possible.  However, people 
may have got the idea that producing a disc set is a relatively quick 
automated process. It takes me 30-50 hours to produce a set.  The 
development over this time has been considerable, from one partialy 
filled CD (with dependency checking disabled) to K15 and its 17 images.  

Please note that I am trying to retire from this task.  Age is catching up 
with me.

Phil.

-- 
  Philip Charles; 39a Paterson Street, Abbotsford, Dunedin, New Zealand
   +64 3 488 2818        Fax +64 3 488 2875        Mobile 027 663 4453
   philipc@copyleft.co.nz - personal.    info@copyleft.co.nz - business