2 Nov 2010 19:33
Re: Cooperation with Listaller in dependency-management
Matthias Klumpp <matthias <at> nlinux.org>
2010-11-02 18:33:54 GMT
2010-11-02 18:33:54 GMT
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 18:00:01 +0100, Anders F Björklund <afb <at> users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Matthias Klumpp wrote: > >>> That is why I started on recreating some of them from scratch. >>> Parts at http://afb.users.sourceforge.net/zero-install/index/ >> This looks nice, I think it's exactly what I need! > > As you might have noticed, there are two types of feeds. > > One is just repackaged from the vendor, and those are > currently lacking most if not all of the dependencies: > http://afb.users.sourceforge.net/zero-install/interfaces/firefox.xml > http://afb.users.sourceforge.net/zero-install/interfaces/thunderbird.xml ...this can be changed! If the new dependency-scanner is ready, these feeds can be autocompleted using LiDepScan and Debian's DDE. > Others are created from scratch, but do require some > build system for the "base" dependencies (gcc, make): > http://afb.users.sourceforge.net/zero-install/interfaces/python.xml > http://afb.users.sourceforge.net/zero-install/interfaces/gnupg.xml > > There needs to be more created-from-source type feeds... I'm going to push binreloc (to create relocatable binaries) a little more, so creating relocatable apps will become easier. > But some packages require extensive patching to work with > Zero Install. For instance the GNU Build System (Autotools) > have some paths hardcoded, so those don't work as feeds (yet). > It should be possible to patch them, to use variables instead ?(Continue reading)
Things I'm
really not sure about are in [...].
Here's how it works:
- Each Implementation has a set of zero or more named Commands.
- A Command is a way to run an Implementation.
- Three pre-defined command names are "run" (to run the program),
"test" (run the self tests) and "compile". These replace the "main",
"self-test" and "compile:command" attributes.
So:
<implementation main='bin/prog' self-test='tests/alltests.py' ...>
...
</implementation>
Can now also be written as:
<implementation ...>
<command name='run' path='bin/prog'/>
<command name='test' path='tests/alltests.py'/>
...
</implementation>
[ should we rename 'path' to 'exec'? we also need to support arbitrary
shell commands if we want to replace compile:command ]
RSS Feed