[arch-dev-public] devtools, archiso, et al

[Aaron Griffin]

On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
> Eric Bélanger wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Eric Bélanger <snowmaniscool at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Allan McRae wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Allan McRae wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Allan McRae wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan McGee wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Aaron Griffin
>>>>>>>> <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Aaron Griffin
>>>>>>>>> <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Eric Bélanger
>>>>>>>>>> <snowmaniscool at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Aaron Griffin
>>>>>>>>>>> <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:39 AM, Allan McRae
>>>>>>>>>>>> <allan at archlinux.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any update for devtools? I'm still using 2.6.29.1-2 as I want to
>>>>>>>>>>> keep
>>>>>>>>>>> using my chroots.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you want to jump ahead:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> http://code.phraktured.net/cgit.cgi/devtools/commit/?id=ca87391f99760dc6677df419031108e65b588ecd
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The patch is simple, as aufs supports unionfs syntax too. Actually
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> sed "s/unionfs/aufs/" should actually work too.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Make sure to install aufs2-util though
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Any qualms with me releasing devtools as it is from git?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes- it installs a communitypkg script that will no longer work with
>>>>>>>> the tupkg uploader, as it has been switched to use the devtools and
>>>>>>>> upload to our other server.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suppose we can just not distribute that in the package for the time
>>>>>>> being. Anyway, I will be taking the git versions of the building
>>>>>>> scripts for
>>>>>>> a spin later today so I can give them a good testing before you make
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Issues I have with makechrootpkg (git master with Aaron's master
>>>>>> merged):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) there is a whole heap of issues with using ""'s around variables
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> have *'s in them.  So the * is not getting expanded and there are
>>>>>> issues
>>>>>> copying the completed packages and adding them to a db.  I will send a
>>>>>> patch
>>>>>> soon.  However the fix stops people using base chroot directories with
>>>>>> spaces in them.  I personally don't care about that possibility and
>>>>>> prefer
>>>>>> things to work in some form...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) I get output like:
>>>>>> which: no namcap in
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (/home/allan/bin:/home/allan/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin/perlbin/site:/usr/bin/perlbin/vendor:/usr/bin/perlbin/core)
>>>>>> because the redirection to /dev/null is not quite right.  Again, patch
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> its way...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Patch attached.  Applies on top of devtools git master with Aaron's
>>>>> master
>>>>> merged on top.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ignore that patch.  Running with this fix exposed an error in the test
>>>> of
>>>> whether to add a package to a repo.  That is included in the patch on my
>>>> git
>>>> web (http://dev.archlinux.org/~allan/gitweb/gitweb.cgi).
>>>>
>>>> Allan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe it would be simpler to just push a new devtools package with
>>> only the fix to use aufs2 instead of unionfs to get this out of the
>>> way. After that, we could look into releasing a new tarball from git.
>>>
>
> I have built quite a few packages with the build tools (including my patch)
> now and they seem to be working fine.  Have not tested the upload scripts at
> all, but I think they are less changed.  I think a new release should not be
> too risky.

Maybe we could back out the community changes for now, and release.
Dan, opinions? I'm assuming that the community move is still a ways
away (blame me), so waiting for this might not be worth it.

>> On a related note: What are we going to do with the unionfs-utils
>> package? Remove it? It's out-of-date and on the licence rebuild list.
>>
>
> I'd guess remove it.  Is it of any use at all now?

Considering our kernel doesn't support unionfs (which is mostly
supplanted by aufs anyway), it isn't of any use to us, but would make
sense in the AUR for those who include unionfs in their custom
kernels.