fullofdaylight | 1 Apr 01:33 2008

Re: Slackware integration


> On 16/02/2008, Thomas Leonard <talex5 <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 07/02/2008, fullofdaylight <at> no-log.org <fullofdaylight <at> no-log.org>
>> wrote:
>>  >
>>  > > On 07/02/2008, fullofdaylight <at> no-log.org
>> <fullofdaylight <at> no-log.org>
>>  > > wrote:
>>  > >> Hello,
>> > >> Trying to get Slackware integration for Zero Install [...]
>>  > > OK, you just need to get the version number out. Something like:
>>  > >
>>  > > here = re.compile('^'+pkg+'-([^-]+)(-[^-]+){2}$')
>>  > > for file in os.listdir("/var/log/packages"):
>>  > >       match = here.match(file)
>>  > >       if match:
>>  > >               print match.group(1)
>>  > >
>>  >
>>  > Your script works well, it returns the right package version (if the
>>  > package is installed). How can we integrate it into Zero Install's
>>  > distro.py file ?
>>
>>
>> You need to add something like this:
>>
>>  class SlackwareDistribution(Distribution):
>>         def get_package_info(self, package, factory):
>>                 version = get_version_for(package)
>>                 if version:
(Continue reading)

Thomas Leonard | 1 Apr 19:21 2008
Picon

Re: Firefox 2.0 interface

On 12/10/2006, Thomas Leonard <talex5 <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:28:35 +0200, Thomas Formella wrote:
>
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > by coincidence, I found injector inferfaces for Firefox 2.0 and Gajim:
>  >
>  > http://holizz.com/software/0install/
>  >
>  > Gajim seems to be broken, though...
>  >
>  > I'm not the packager btw. and I don't know if both packages are intended for
>  > public use or just experimental...
>
>
> Interesting. I've added Firefox to the main list. It uses an unmodified
>  binary from ftp.mozilla.org, which is a good sign that Firefox is easy to
>  package :-)
>
>  Gajim complains that python-sqlite2 isn't found for me, but in fact this
>  error is misleading. The Python module is present, but importing it fails
>  because libsqlite2 isn't found (Debian doesn't seem to have version 2).

Another report:

http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.desktop.rox.user/cutoff=8679

--

-- 
Dr Thomas Leonard		http://rox.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1
(Continue reading)

Thomas Leonard | 8 Apr 17:20 2008
Picon

Re: [rox-users] TaskTray won't run anymore (Debian Lenny)

On 08/04/2008, Dennis Tomas <den.t <at> gmx.de> wrote:
> svetislav.ristic <at> chello.at schrieb:
>
> > I can't run TaskTray anymore. The Download button is shaded. I'm pretty sure it has stopped working since
the last updates I did via aptitude. I use the ROX-Desktop packages from the ftp.berlios.de repos.
>
> I've just upgraded zeroinstall-injector to version 0.32 and get the same
>  error. When the status bar disappears, TaskTray and all its dependencies
>  are marked as available (cached, packaged or local), but the
>  Run/Download button stays greyed out.

OK, I see it too.

It's caused by depending on a single library twice (or, in this case,
by a library that depends on itself). The fix is simple (attached),
but a work-around is to edit:

http://rox4debian.berlios.de/0install/Libwnck18.xml

Remove the <requires> around the <environment> element in:

    <requires interface="http://rox4debian.berlios.de/0install/Libwnck18.xml">
      <environment insert="share" mode="prepend" name="XDG_DATA_DIRS"/>
    </requires>

So it's just:

      <environment insert="share" mode="prepend" name="XDG_DATA_DIRS"/>

However, this requires 0launch >= 0.31 to work.
(Continue reading)

Thomas Leonard | 13 Apr 14:15 2008
Picon

Re: Zero Install in MacPorts

On 17/10/2007, Anders F Björklund <afb <at> macports.org> wrote:
[...]
> I've now added the "rox-all" port too, that
>  has "rox-filer" and "zeroinstall-injector" as
>  dependencies and it installs all the launchers
>  in /opt/local/apps for using with rox/0launch.
>
>  $ sudo port install rox-all
>
>  Will probably add "oroborox" and "rox-session"
>  as ports too (for completeness), but the rest
>  should be able to be done with Zero Install...
>  (they do have a few issues still, mostly paths)

Thanks! I've added a note here:

http://roscidus.com/desktop/MacOSX

--

-- 
Dr Thomas Leonard		http://rox.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
Anders F Björklund | 13 Apr 15:02 2008

Re: Zero Install in MacPorts

Thomas Leonard wrote:

>>  Will probably add "oroborox" and "rox-session"
>>  as ports too (for completeness), but the rest
>>  should be able to be done with Zero Install...
>>  (they do have a few issues still, mostly paths)
>
> Thanks! I've added a note here:
>
> http://roscidus.com/desktop/MacOSX

Ports oroborox and rox-session are still somewhat
quirky to get working fully in MacPorts / Mac OS X,
so I'm leaving it at "rox-all" in order to not make
people get the wrong impression of the rest of ROX...

Current port versions are:
rox-all  <at> 1.3 (x11, rox)
rox-filer  <at> 2.7.1 (x11, rox)
zeroinstall-injector  <at> 0.32 (sysutils)

BTW; the "launch" command would be:
$ /opt/local/bin/rox /opt/local/apps

It should be possible to make a full-screen X11
desktop using ROX, but not too much interest (yet?)
However, the Xfce 4.4 desktop should now be working
so it's probably possible to finish ROX desktop too.

--anders
(Continue reading)

Anders F Björklund | 13 Apr 17:41 2008

tar version check workaround


Would it be possible to integrate this patch upstream ?
http://svn.macports.org/repository/macports/trunk/dports/sysutils/ 
zeroinstall-injector/files/patch-unpack.py

Currently the tar version is reported as something like:
tar (GNU tar) 1.14 +CVE-2006-0300 +CVE-2006-6097

--anders

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
Mildred | 15 Apr 01:25 2008
Picon

source archives - why are there limitations ?

Hi,

Hello everyone, I'm new here :)

I'm going to install Fedora and unfortunately, it's not that easy in
that distribution to create new packages when a software you want is
not yet packaged. So I was thinking of using 0install for that purpose.
So I'm currently testing 0compile and the support of 0install for
source archives.

And it seems that it's not possible to specify more than one line of
shellscript to compile the package. And this makes 0install very
difficult to use because often, compiling a package is not that easy.

So I'm asking why is there only one line allowed. And perhaps, could it
be extended in future versions of 0install ?

There are also many package that doesn't support read-only source tree.
Perhaps it could be specified in the interface file so before running
0compile, the source tree could be copied to a read-write location.

And last thing, would it be possible to add additional files to the
interface file. For example patches, or additional icons, whatever ...
I think it could be useful.

Mildred

--

-- 
Mildred Ki'lya
E-Mail:	mildred593(at)online.fr
(Continue reading)

Lennon Cook | 15 Apr 03:35 2008
Picon

Re: source archives - why are there limitations ?

Mildred <ml.mildred593 <at> online.fr> wrote:
> And it seems that it's not possible to specify more than one line of
> shellscript to compile the package. And this makes 0install very
> difficult to use because often, compiling a package is not that easy.
You can do more than one command on a line with shell operators, eg: 
"$SRCDIR/configure && make && make install" 

If you need much more than that, put a shell script in the source dir
to do the work, and point 0install at *that*.

> There are also many package that doesn't support read-only source
> tree. Perhaps it could be specified in the interface file so before
> running 0compile, the source tree could be copied to a read-write
> location.
Can you name specific packages that do this? 
If they use a makefile, you can do 'make -F $SRCDIR/Makefile' ; if they
use autotools, you can do $SRCDIR/configure ... these require only that
$PWD be writable - not that $SRCDIR be (and they can be different). And
I think that those two between them cover at least 90% of software
about. 

--

-- 
Lennon Victor Cook
"He who receives an idea from me receives without lessening, as he who
lights his candle at mine receives light without darkening" -- Thomas
Jefferson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
(Continue reading)

Thomas Leonard | 16 Apr 20:15 2008
Picon

Re: source archives - why are there limitations ?

On 15/04/2008, Mildred <ml.mildred593 <at> online.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>  Hello everyone, I'm new here :)
>
>  I'm going to install Fedora and unfortunately, it's not that easy in
>  that distribution to create new packages when a software you want is
>  not yet packaged. So I was thinking of using 0install for that purpose.
>  So I'm currently testing 0compile and the support of 0install for
>  source archives.
>
>  And it seems that it's not possible to specify more than one line of
>  shellscript to compile the package. And this makes 0install very
>  difficult to use because often, compiling a package is not that easy.
>
>  So I'm asking why is there only one line allowed. And perhaps, could it
>  be extended in future versions of 0install ?
>
>  There are also many package that doesn't support read-only source tree.
>  Perhaps it could be specified in the interface file so before running
>  0compile, the source tree could be copied to a read-write location.

Agreed, I think we should support an option for this.

>  And last thing, would it be possible to add additional files to the
>  interface file. For example patches, or additional icons, whatever ...
>  I think it could be useful.

You can use the <recipe> element if required, but it might be better
to ask the author to apply your patches to the original version...
(Continue reading)

Thomas Leonard | 16 Apr 20:21 2008
Picon

Re: tar version check workaround

On 13/04/2008, Anders F Björklund <afb <at> macports.org> wrote:
>
>  Would it be possible to integrate this patch upstream ?
>  http://svn.macports.org/repository/macports/trunk/dports/sysutils/
>  zeroinstall-injector/files/patch-unpack.py
>
>  Currently the tar version is reported as something like:
>  tar (GNU tar) 1.14 +CVE-2006-0300 +CVE-2006-6097

Perhaps we should just strip off everything after the space? Also, it
might be better to use Python's re module, as I suspect that Windows
doesn't have 'sed'.

--

-- 
Dr Thomas Leonard		http://rox.sourceforge.net
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone

Gmane