[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GSoC application deadline passed
From: |
Philip Charles |
Subject: |
Re: GSoC application deadline passed |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Mar 2008 02:13:49 +1300 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.7 |
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
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, (continued)
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Arne Babenhauserheide, 2008/03/17
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Samuel Thibault, 2008/03/17
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Michal Suchanek, 2008/03/17
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Samuel Thibault, 2008/03/18
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Michal Suchanek, 2008/03/18
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Samuel Thibault, 2008/03/18
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Michal Suchanek, 2008/03/18
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Samuel Thibault, 2008/03/18
- Package installability and testing (was: Re: GSoC application deadline passed), Michael Banck, 2008/03/18
- Re: Package installability and testing, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/03/19
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed,
Philip Charles <=
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Shakthi Kannan, 2008/03/18
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Philip Charles, 2008/03/18
- Building the CDs (was Re: GSoC application deadline passed), Pierre THIERRY, 2008/03/18
- Automated releases (was: GSoC application deadline passed), olafBuddenhagen, 2008/03/18
- Re: Automated releases (was: GSoC application deadline passed), Pierre THIERRY, 2008/03/18
- Re: Automated releases (was: GSoC application deadline passed), Samuel Thibault, 2008/03/19
- Re: Automated releases, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/03/19
- Re: Automated releases, Michael Casadevall, 2008/03/19
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, olafBuddenhagen, 2008/03/18
- Re: GSoC application deadline passed, Philip Charles, 2008/03/18