On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:08:56 -0500 "Aaron Griffin" <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/17/06, Charles Mauch <cmauch@taclug.org> wrote:
The build process is fairly error-free at this point, though it took more than a week of hacking to get it error-free. :)
The process works something like this....
1. Every night my cpan modules list is updated via a cron job. 2. About 30 minutes later, I scrape the above url for modules to build. 3. If there is a difference between the cpan module version and the repo version, the module is built, and a build-report is generated. 4a. The next morning I commit any changes to the repo via svn. 4b. I have code ready to auto-commit changes to the repo, but I'd like let things run for a week or two before I allow the script to bypass the last vestiges of human control of the process. :)
This is rather ingenious. I actually think this makes far more sense than what I had in mind. I'm sure Xentac has a comment or two on this.
Comments... let's see... What happens if a build fails? That's my biggest concern. What about dependencies? Is this a clean system building packages or could dependencies sneak in without us having a way to tweak them? Don't get me wrong, it's definitely a good idea. I'm still noodling it, but on the surface, it seems good.
The idea I had was to use the libalpm bindings to create a perl frontend which grabbed things from CPAN and wrote db information upon install. This would tie together with some meta naming.... i.e. perl:libxml would call the perl plugin.
This is actually a superior idea IMO, and could be extended infinitely (to python, et al) and not require a complex plugin system in pacman to do this.
This is one of the reasons I wrote pacbuild... too bad it's still not done... While the actual building is only one part of this, you'd need something if it was extended to all packages. Jason