trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: December 2011

Re: [trinity-devel] Trinity 3.5.13 build for Arch linux

From: Baho Utot <baho-utot@...>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:18:54 -0500
On Friday 23 December 2011 04:42:07 pm Calvin Morrison wrote:
> On 23 December 2011 16:25, Baho Utot <baho-utot@...> wrote:
> > On Friday 23 December 2011 04:18:37 pm Calvin Morrison wrote:
> > > On 23 December 2011 11:17, Baho Utot <baho-utot@...> wrote:
> > > > On Friday 23 December 2011 02:58:43 pm Calvin Morrison wrote:
> > > > > Baho,
> > > > >
> > > > > I think again we are duplicating our work. Me and Pawel have had
> > > >
> > > > PKGBUILDs
> > > >
> > > > > available for some time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Calvin
> > > >
> > > > [putolin]
> > > >
> > > > Have not seen them.
> > > >
> > > > My pkgbuilds are very different from the ones in AUR.
> > > >
> > > > I have TDE going into /usr.  I have to fix a small issue with my qt3
> > > > so qt4 can be installed without error though.
> > >
> > > That's not a big difference - only a path. I don't see why we continue
> > > to duplicate our work. All of our sources so far are available in the
> > > Git repository.
> > >
> > > Calvin
> >
> > Didn't see them.
> >
> >  Sorry I don't see my work as a duplication.
>
> Duplicate - 3. To make or perform again; repeat.
>
> You are duplicating the work when you could be contributing.

I see it as an alternative.

>
> > I have developed my pkgbuilds to
> > work with a fresh install of arch linux and to adhere and integrate into
> > arch
> > linux the way the arch developers have out lined in their package
> > building guide.
>
> Wow thats awesome! why don't you contribute to the project by helping us?
> It seems ridiculous for you to be playing the part of Maverick here
> especially since I don't even really want to do the packaging. I'm just
> doing it because no one else has stepped up yet.

It takes me a little longer to get things done as I am an old fart.  What I 
would like to do is to get my pkbuilds into git so anyone can clone the repo 
and then fix, add to the work etc.

What has been missing as I see it is a place for a git repo so anyone can pull 
from it and make the builds better.  I don't see that as being a maverick,  
to me you folks have abondoned me to my own accord.

I was willing to put from a git repo and contribute, but first I needed to 
learn how to package trinity and then learn git.  I think I now have a solid 
trinty build "system" in place.

I am starting learning git right now.

>
> The Arch Way as far as I see it implies leaving everything upstream.
>

Want to guess who's the upstream for trinity?


> > I also build in a clean chroot environment and namcap both the
> > packages and the build scripts.  The scripts I have are not completely
> > without error according to namacp but they are really close.  I have
> > examined
> > the scripts in AUR, they are not to my standards.
>
> Doesn't everyone else do this? :-) I test our scripts not in a chroot, but
> a VM. Even cleaner.
>

Maybe so, but testing in a new install I think is better is even better.

> namcap is a great utility which I have not utilized much.  While examining
> the scripts in the AUR you didn't think to improve them or even bother to
> talk to us? Instead you went your own way? I don't mean to be harsh but
> this all seems very counter intuitive.

I had a bunch of problems with building the autotool packages, no one seemed 
to help except for Laurent Dard to which I am very very greatfull.  From his 
help I found that the qt3 build was greatly borked.  I have learned a lot 
with his help.  I was able to correct my entire TDE build which was at that 
time horrible.  BTW the AUR qt script has the same issues I had.
>
> Instead of completely shrugging off the work we've put into in, why not
> work together? Everyone here is rooting for Trinity, and we are both arch
> users.

Some times for me I need to go it alone so I can learn.  I am not as fast at 
this as others are.