[arch-general] Splitting up the 'boinc' package

[Jaroslav Lichtblau]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:47:14PM +0200, Karol Babioch wrote:
> On Mo, 2009-10-19 at 23:03 +0200, Daniel Riedemann wrote:
> > I don't know if 6.6.38 build correctly, if you have a working PKGBUILD I
> > think everyone would be happy (since it is stable). But I don't know if that
> > is possible now since a higher version is already in the repos. That would
> > mean everybody has to force a downgrade?
> As we would provide new package names (something like boinc-client,
> boinc-manager, etc. this shouldn't be a problem at all. We could easily
> set a conflict flag.
> 
> On Mo, 2009-10-19 at 23:03 +0200, Daniel Riedemann wrote:
> > I could help you writing the split package but I don't have much time this
> > week. I can't assure you anything ;o)
> It doesn't hurt that much, we could work it out the following week(s),
> it was just a general idea from me.

Hi all,
first of all, sorry for the late answer. I was quite busy with real
life this week.
Yes, I uploaded the development version to the repository. The stable
version there 6.4.5 was very old and I was not able to build the new
stable version even after a lot of trying. I just wanted to have a
newer version than the out-of-date 6.4.5
For the ATI GPUs: you'll need 6.10.3 or later, said the boinc page, so
I took the latest version which built fine, let it run on my 3
computers to find out if there are any problems. After few days
testing, with no problems, no crashes, I placed it in community.
I could have guessed it will not pass unnoticed. I have to apologize,
if I caused any troubles with this step, but at least there are no
bugs reported, so maybe this didn't cause any harm until now.
Now to the package itself.
To be honest, I don't like the Debian structure of the boinc packages. 
Arch also does not have any openssh-server/openssh-client packages.
In my opinion AUR and ABS are the best places for providing such
specialities. 
Or maybe the new package splitting could be used here instead. I didn't have
time to study this properly until now, so hints are very welcome.
Nevertheless thanks for bringing this up and we may discuss further.

> 
> On Mo, 2009-10-19 at 23:03 +0200, Daniel Riedemann wrote:
> > Sorry for being a bit off topic, but Jaroslav Lichtblau copied a bit from my
> > PKGBUILD and left the configure option --optimize in the PKGBUILD. Does the
> > current package work for you? Because --optimize breaks the standard makepkg
> > CFLAGS ... Or is "-ffast-math -O3" considered safe for offical builds?
> I'm not that kind of deep into the compiling thing, so without looking
> it up, I don't even know what this option exactly stands for ;). I guess
> this would be your part right then ;).
> 
> I will contact you personally, so we can share our knowledge and work it
> out together ;). Anyone who wants to participate also, is free to
> contact us.

Count me in, I'm open to any suggestions.

See you around,
Jaroslav

> 
> -- 
> Karol Babioch <karol at babioch.de>


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20091023/0b42adf3/attachment.bin>