| All Forums |
Register |
Login |
Search |
Subscriptions |
My Profile |
Inbox |
| Tool Warehouse |
FAQs |
Resources |
Help |
Member List |
Address Book |
Logout |
|
|
Creating packages for contribution?
|
Logged in as: Guest |
| Users viewing this topic: none |
|
Login  |
|
|
 Creating packages for contribution? - May 26, '06, 12:11:26 PM
|
|
|
steveh
Posts: 195
Joined: Jan. 23, '04,
Status: offline
|
Had a dig but cant find any concrete answers on how to package up a port for contribution.
Do you guys have a quick guide you could post so we can help out and upload packages be that just updates or new packages.
I ask as just updated rsync here from source to 2.6.8 and it compiled and worked right off the bat including increasing performance from 400Kb/s on transfers to 4Mb/s
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - May 26, '06, 1:46:00 PM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
There are two sources of information:
The pkg_create man page and then on the ftp site there is
a directory with notes and sample control files (pkgs/packaging/*).
In this particular case the information in the existing package can be
reused. I always suggest people look at an existing one anyway. For this
you take a package and un-tar it rather than installing it. Then look at
the control files for comparison. Rsync is a pretty simple one to do.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - May 26, '06, 1:54:10 PM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
I should mention also about "off_t" with Interix.
On 32-bit platforms the off_t is 4 bytes.
On 64-bit platforms the off_t is 8 bytes.
So on 32 bit platforms Interix can get to 2G (4G is special circumstances) per file.
On 64 bit platforms Interix can get to 2T per file.
It's on things like this that there is a need for two packages.
32-bit is first though.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - May 26, '06, 11:09:27 PM
|
|
|
steveh
Posts: 195
Joined: Jan. 23, '04,
Status: offline
|
Thanks for the info there rodney I'll look at putting together an update for rsync.
Once done where to do put it or do we post you a link to download.
While you mention 32bit off_t is that ever going to get updated as it currently means our main installs cant use interix due to file size issues. Seem strange to have such a limitation when the OS and even cygwin doesnt have the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - May 27, '06, 1:07:27 AM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
> While you mention 32bit off_t is that ever going to get updated ...
I don't know MS's plans on this. ISV's and users really want it with 32-bit.
Historically this stems back to the late 1980's when the smaller off_t was
more than enough. Softway had the larger off_t on the plan list in 1999 (when
Interix went to MS) for release in 2000/2001. But I don't know where this fits
with MS right now because of the long held "everything can still run on a future
version" mantra. I'll ask and see if I get an answer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - Jul. 5, '06, 9:20:31 AM
|
|
|
cheusov
Posts: 14
Joined: Jul. 13, '05,
Status: offline
|
Look at pkgsrc.org, a packaging software originally developped
for NetBSD but now it is portable to many platforms including Interix.
There are some problems with it, but in general it is
very convenient for use.
I don't understand why Interopsys don't use it.
BTW, at sf.net there is a pkgsrc-wip project where people
create packages which are not a part of the official pkgsrc distribution.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - Jul. 5, '06, 2:21:44 PM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
> I don't understand why Interopsys don't use it.
First it did not exist when we started packaging.
We are not using pkg as it existed then. The NetBSD FAQ about pkg
here is incorrect BTW: it is not the same as NetBSD last left it.
The version here has continued to have features added. It is also C based rather
than script based, distributions are binary, the SDK's do not need to be installed, etc.
There are many similarities because of the common heritage. And both are a lot easier to
use (creator and end-user) than many other installers.
There are ISV's distributing Interix packages using the /Tools pkg and we continue
to allow any ISV to do so freely.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - Jul. 6, '06, 6:02:08 AM
|
|
|
cheusov
Posts: 14
Joined: Jul. 13, '05,
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Rodney
> The version here has continued to have features added.
AFAIU your packaging system was based on OpenBSD one.
Theare some incompatibilities with NetBSD pkgsrc,
in particular pkgsrc has no pkg_update.
It is not a big problem for fulltimers ;)
> It is also C based rather
> than script based, distributions are binary,
pkgsrc works fine with binary packages too.
> the SDK's do not need to be installed, etc.
Ig you use pkgsrc binary distribution you don'y need pkgsrc/ at all.
It is only needed for building packages.
> There are many similarities because of the common heritage. And both are a lot easier to
> use (creator and end-user) than many other installers.
pkgsrc is very easy to create a new package, much easier than Linux's .deb or .rpm
and much closer to interopsys pkg.
> There are ISV's distributing Interix packages using the /Tools pkg and we continue
> to allow any ISV to do so freely.
I just wanted to say that pkgsrc is good solution for Interix users,
and probably for your business too ;)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Creating packages for contribution? - Jul. 6, '06, 12:41:40 PM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
> AFAIU your packaging system was based on OpenBSD one.
Yes, which was based on the NBSD one which was based on the FBSD
by Jordan Hubbard. And then changes are crossed amongst them all.
Like many of the BSD things it all gets around.
> pkgsrc is very easy to create a new package, much easier than Linux's .deb or .rpm
> and much closer to interopsys pkg.
Yes, 'rpm' sucks in comparison. And comments about MSI must go unspoken because
the proper curse words have not yet been created. That's why I original chose to use pkg.
The heritage of 'pkgsrc' is that it derives from Jordan's (and other contributors) design.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
|
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
Printable Version
