[arch-general] package sources on ftp.archlinux.org
Hi, I often have issues with $ makepkg --allsource when I build source package which uses ftp.archlinux.org Today they are: qt texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc Should I create bug or sources are removed from ftp for some reason?
2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>:
Hi,
I often have issues with $ makepkg --allsource when I build source package which uses ftp.archlinux.org
Today they are:
qt texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc
Should I create bug or sources are removed from ftp for some reason?
The sources should remain on ftp.archlinux.org as long as the version exists in ABS, though that's not set-in-stone. Are you using an ABS PKGBUILD, or one of your own making?
The sources should remain on ftp.archlinux.org as long as the version exists in ABS, though that's not set-in-stone. Are you using an ABS PKGBUILD, or one of your own making?
I use 'svnsync'ed repo and do 'makepkg --allsources' for all packages in repos/ subdirs. So I can say I use ABS.
2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>:
The sources should remain on ftp.archlinux.org as long as the version exists in ABS, though that's not set-in-stone. Are you using an ABS PKGBUILD, or one of your own making?
I use 'svnsync'ed repo and do 'makepkg --allsources' for all packages in repos/ subdirs.
So I can say I use ABS.
So... what's the exact error? And how quickly are you doing this? There is a delay between the arch dev machine that the developers use and ftp.archlinux.org (about 5-15 minutes IIRC)
So... what's the exact error? And how quickly are you doing this? There is a delay between the arch dev machine that the developers use and ftp.archlinux.org (about 5-15 minutes IIRC)
Do you mean that ftp.archlinux.org synchronizes with dev machine? I do $ svnsync --non-interactive sync file://localhost//srv/base-repos.svn $ svn up # from locally synced mirror svnsync works with svn://svn.archlinux.org or with svn+ssh://aur.archlinux.org for community. So I think I get freshest PKGBUILDs. then I iterate all of repos/ subdirs and try to do makepkg --allsource. Generally error is 'file not found' for packages which use ftp.archlinux.org in sources array. For example texlive-core-doc: $ makepkg --allsource ==> Making package: texlive-core-doc 2008.13013-1 x86_64 (Пнд Окт 5 20:41:41 MSD 2009) ==> Retrieving Sources... -> Downloading texlive-core-doc-src.zip... --2009-10-05 20:41:41-- ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/texlive-core-doc-src.zip => “texlive-core-doc-src.zip.part” Resolving ftp.archlinux.org... 209.85.41.144, 209.85.41.143 Connecting to ftp.archlinux.org|209.85.41.144|:21... connected. Logging in as anonymous ... Logged in! ==> SYST ... done. ==> PWD ... done. ==> TYPE I ... done. ==> CWD (1) /other/texlive ... done. ==> SIZE texlive-core-doc-src.zip ... done. ==> PASV ... done. ==> RETR texlive-core-doc-src.zip ... No such file “texlive-core-doc-src.zip”. ==> ERROR: Failure while downloading texlive-core-doc-src.zip Aborting...
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com> wrote:
So... what's the exact error? And how quickly are you doing this? There is a delay between the arch dev machine that the developers use and ftp.archlinux.org (about 5-15 minutes IIRC)
Do you mean that ftp.archlinux.org synchronizes with dev machine?
Yes. And, for the record, the only packages using the official ftp should be official packages. There's nothing setup to support community packages using this yet. But it looks like the texlive doc packages were intended to use the actual sources without the -doc suffix there
Btw, if someone interested in, here is the list of packages which failed last time: abyssws aqua-data-studio autojump choqok colorgcc cross-arm-wince-cegcc-gdb cross-arm-wince-cegcc-gdbstub emerald-themes fcpcmcia flashplugin flickrnet foomatic foomatic-db foomatic-db-engine foomatic-db-hpijs foomatic-db-nonfree foomatic-filters fop g2sc glob2 gogh gtk-rezlooks-engine icoconvert java-gnome john kazehakase kmess libtango musepack-tools opencv openoffice-base-beta openoffice-base-devel openoffice-i18n pessulus phonon-xine plan9port qt selinux-flex sunbird swftools tango-generator texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc thunderbird-spell-i18n tinyxml vim-colorsamplerpack visualboyadvance xsane youtube-dl
Question: Are these packages that need fixing as I have vested interest in 1 or 2 of them. Thanks 2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>
Btw, if someone interested in, here is the list of packages which failed last time:
abyssws aqua-data-studio autojump choqok colorgcc cross-arm-wince-cegcc-gdb cross-arm-wince-cegcc-gdbstub emerald-themes fcpcmcia flashplugin flickrnet foomatic foomatic-db foomatic-db-engine foomatic-db-hpijs foomatic-db-nonfree foomatic-filters fop g2sc glob2 gogh gtk-rezlooks-engine icoconvert java-gnome john kazehakase kmess libtango musepack-tools opencv openoffice-base-beta openoffice-base-devel openoffice-i18n pessulus phonon-xine plan9port qt selinux-flex sunbird swftools tango-generator texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc thunderbird-spell-i18n tinyxml vim-colorsamplerpack visualboyadvance xsane youtube-dl
-- Dave ------------- root@crankyadmin.net cranky@archlinux.us
2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>:
Btw, if someone interested in, here is the list of packages which failed last time:
abyssws aqua-data-studio autojump choqok colorgcc cross-arm-wince-cegcc-gdb cross-arm-wince-cegcc-gdbstub emerald-themes fcpcmcia flashplugin flickrnet foomatic foomatic-db foomatic-db-engine foomatic-db-hpijs foomatic-db-nonfree foomatic-filters fop g2sc glob2 gogh gtk-rezlooks-engine icoconvert java-gnome john kazehakase kmess libtango musepack-tools opencv openoffice-base-beta openoffice-base-devel openoffice-i18n pessulus phonon-xine plan9port qt selinux-flex sunbird swftools tango-generator texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc thunderbird-spell-i18n tinyxml vim-colorsamplerpack visualboyadvance xsane youtube-dl
These are PKGBUILD errors. Additionally, it looks like someone has removed old verisons as only the latest seem to exist here: ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/ Please take this up with the individual maintainers or file a bug report or something
Aaron Griffin a écrit :
2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>:
Btw, if someone interested in, here is the list of packages which failed last time:
<snip>
texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc thunderbird-spell-i18n
<snip>
These are PKGBUILD errors. Additionally, it looks like someone has
someone = me :) see further below
removed old verisons as only the latest seem to exist here: ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/
Please take this up with the individual maintainers or file a bug report or something
I don't know about the texlive-*-doc packages from community, which are maintained by Stefan Hussman. Feel free to ask him directly or to file a bug report. In the case of the texlive packages in extra, I always upload the sources to ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/ and usually leave the source tarball for at least the last two versions. It does happen that I forget, however, and Eric usually reminds me quickly ;) I think keeping the tarballs for the last two versions is sane, but if someone thinks otherwise, I can leave them available for a longer period. Opinion on this? Now, more spefically: * texlive-core : sources are up-to-date, so probably your ABS tree was not in sync. * texlive-bibtexextra : the latest source tarball was indeed missing, fixed now! Thanks, F
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
Aaron Griffin a écrit :
2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>:
Btw, if someone interested in, here is the list of packages which failed last time:
<snip>
texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc thunderbird-spell-i18n
<snip>
These are PKGBUILD errors. Additionally, it looks like someone has
someone = me :) see further below
removed old verisons as only the latest seem to exist here: ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/
Please take this up with the individual maintainers or file a bug report or something
I don't know about the texlive-*-doc packages from community, which are maintained by Stefan Hussman. Feel free to ask him directly or to file a bug report.
In the case of the texlive packages in extra, I always upload the sources to ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/ and usually leave the source tarball for at least the last two versions. It does happen that I forget, however, and Eric usually reminds me quickly ;)
I think keeping the tarballs for the last two versions is sane, but if someone thinks otherwise, I can leave them available for a longer period. Opinion on this?
Now, more spefically: * texlive-core : sources are up-to-date, so probably your ABS tree was not in sync. * texlive-bibtexextra : the latest source tarball was indeed missing, fixed now!
It's also possible that the -doc packages are farther behind, and sources have been removed for those simply because they're not up to speed with the official texlive packages
Aaron Griffin schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
Aaron Griffin a écrit :
2009/10/5 Sergej Pupykin <pupykin.s@gmail.com>:
Btw, if someone interested in, here is the list of packages which failed last time:
<snip>
texlive-bibtexextra texlive-bibtexextra-doc texlive-core texlive-core-doc texlive-fontsextra-doc texlive-formatsextra-doc texlive-games-doc texlive-genericextra-doc texlive-htmlxml-doc texlive-humanities-doc texlive-langcjk-doc texlive-langcyrillic-doc texlive-langextra-doc texlive-langgreek-doc texlive-latex3-doc texlive-latexextra-doc texlive-music-doc texlive-pictures-doc texlive-plainextra-doc texlive-pstricks-doc texlive-publishers-doc texlive-science-doc thunderbird-spell-i18n
<snip>
These are PKGBUILD errors. Additionally, it looks like someone has
someone = me :) see further below
removed old verisons as only the latest seem to exist here: ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/
Please take this up with the individual maintainers or file a bug report or something
I don't know about the texlive-*-doc packages from community, which are maintained by Stefan Hussman. Feel free to ask him directly or to file a bug report.
In the case of the texlive packages in extra, I always upload the sources to ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/texlive/ and usually leave the source tarball for at least the last two versions. It does happen that I forget, however, and Eric usually reminds me quickly ;)
I think keeping the tarballs for the last two versions is sane, but if someone thinks otherwise, I can leave them available for a longer period. Opinion on this?
Now, more spefically: * texlive-core : sources are up-to-date, so probably your ABS tree was not in sync. * texlive-bibtexextra : the latest source tarball was indeed missing, fixed now!
It's also possible that the -doc packages are farther behind, and sources have been removed for those simply because they're not up to speed with the official texlive packages
Hello, the -doc packages are far behind because I did not manage to build them correctly, i.e to download the doc packages in a similar way Firmicus does for the normal packages. I did not upload the zip-files to ftp.archlinux.org because I do not see a reason for doing so and the packages are quite big. No user probably wants to update a the packages that way or will be able to do so. Regards Stefan Husmann
Stefan Husmann a écrit :
Aaron Griffin schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
I don't know about the texlive-*-doc packages from community, which are maintained by Stefan Hussman. Feel free to ask him directly or to file a bug report. <snip>
It's also possible that the -doc packages are farther behind, and sources have been removed for those simply because they're not up to speed with the official texlive packages
Hello,
the -doc packages are far behind because I did not manage to build them correctly, i.e to download the doc packages in a similar way Firmicus does for the normal packages. I did not upload the zip-files to ftp.archlinux.org because I do not see a reason for doing so and the packages are quite big. No user probably wants to update a the packages that way or will be able to do so. Regards Stefan Husmann
The reason for doing so is simple: the TeXLive license *requires* us to provide the sources :) BTW if you have problems with my texlive-scripts, feel free to ask ;) FC
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
Stefan Husmann a écrit :
Aaron Griffin schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
I don't know about the texlive-*-doc packages from community, which are maintained by Stefan Hussman. Feel free to ask him directly or to file a bug report. <snip>
It's also possible that the -doc packages are farther behind, and sources have been removed for those simply because they're not up to speed with the official texlive packages
Hello,
the -doc packages are far behind because I did not manage to build them correctly, i.e to download the doc packages in a similar way Firmicus does for the normal packages. I did not upload the zip-files to ftp.archlinux.org because I do not see a reason for doing so and the packages are quite big. No user probably wants to update a the packages that way or will be able to do so. Regards Stefan Husmann
The reason for doing so is simple: the TeXLive license *requires* us to provide the sources :)
BTW if you have problems with my texlive-scripts, feel free to ask ;)
Aren't the docs in the same source tarballs? Couldn't you just pull the existing texlive tarballs and use those?
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 23:57, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
The reason for doing so is simple: the TeXLive license *requires* us to provide the sources :)
BTW if you have problems with my texlive-scripts, feel free to ask ;)
Aren't the docs in the same source tarballs? Couldn't you just pull the existing texlive tarballs and use those?
Don't we have a special script that downloads sources of packages? Why the sources of texlive are in /other/texlive/ then? -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 23:57, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
The reason for doing so is simple: the TeXLive license *requires* us to provide the sources :)
BTW if you have problems with my texlive-scripts, feel free to ask ;)
Aren't the docs in the same source tarballs? Couldn't you just pull the existing texlive tarballs and use those?
Don't we have a special script that downloads sources of packages? Why the sources of texlive are in /other/texlive/ then?
You are confusing sources and sourceballs. ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other is intendend for source tarballs for projects that are no longer hosted upstream, SCM snapshots, homemade projects, etc. ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/sources is intendend for sourceballs of packages where the license forces us to also host the sources (GPL2, GPL, etc.).
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 4:37 AM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 23:57, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Firmicus <Firmicus@gmx.net> wrote:
The reason for doing so is simple: the TeXLive license *requires* us to provide the sources :)
BTW if you have problems with my texlive-scripts, feel free to ask ;)
Aren't the docs in the same source tarballs? Couldn't you just pull the existing texlive tarballs and use those?
Don't we have a special script that downloads sources of packages? Why the sources of texlive are in /other/texlive/ then?
You are confusing sources and sourceballs.
ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other is intendend for source tarballs for projects that are no longer hosted upstream, SCM snapshots, homemade projects, etc.
ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/sources is intendend for sourceballs of packages where the license forces us to also host the sources (GPL2, GPL, etc.).
And technically, those packages that have sources in /other/ can be skipped by the sourceball script, as it makes it redundant. But then again, it's not much extra space :)
participants (7)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
David Houston
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Firmicus
-
Roman Kyrylych
-
Sergej Pupykin
-
Stefan Husmann