www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - DDebber Request for Review

reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
I would like to announce DDebber.

http://dsource.org/projects/ddebber

This program will generate a .deb package from a Digital Mars zip file. Two
packages are generated, an i386 version and amd64. The amd64 packages does not
contain a 64bit compiler, but depends on the needed 32bit libraries.

I'm interested in feed back as to whether the program works for others. What is
missing unclear from the documentation (I need to clean it up). And if there
are any issues with the package generated.

I'm also interested to hear from those using a Debian based system and don't
install via .deb, what has been stopping you?

Walter,

    I have a few things that need to be finished, but what would it take to get
you to use this when you go to publish a new version of dmd? I really want to
split the zip into several packages, what would it take for Digital Mars to
host a repository? If the program could also build packages for
programs/libraries like Descent, would they be hosted on the Official D site?
Mar 24 2010
next sibling parent reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Jesse Phillips" <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:hodlsk$2ue3$1 digitalmars.com...

 I'm also interested to hear from those using a Debian based system and 
 don't install via .deb, what has been stopping you?


My (weak) explanation: My primary system is windows, so I'm accustomed to 
just using the zips. So when I go over to my Ubuntu system, I've just been 
using those out of habit and familiarity (and it seems to work). I could 
easily be persuaded to switch to .deb given any (even minor) reason to do so 
and easy-to-remember knowledge of where to easily get ahold of up-to-date 
DMD .debs.



 I'm interested in feed back as to whether the program works for others. 
 What is missing unclear from the documentation (I need to clean it up). 
 And if there are any issues with the package generated.


I'll try to remember to try it out next time use my Linux box (Don't have 
time at the moment, though).
Mar 24 2010
parent Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Nick Sabalausky Wrote:


 I could 
 easily be persuaded to switch to .deb given any (even minor) reason to do so 
 and easy-to-remember knowledge of where to easily get ahold of up-to-date 
 DMD .debs.


For the current situation I couldn't give you a reason to switch. If I can get
more packages and a repository, then you'd get updates and have proper conflict
resolution when say you install Tango which doesn't work with the latest DMD
you have installed. Or install DWT and the proper Tango package is pulled in.
Mar 24 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Jesse Phillips wrote:

 I would like to announce DDebber.
 
 http://dsource.org/projects/ddebber



Looks like we have an embarrassment of riches here. Jordi Sayol i Salomó has 
sent me a shell script to do it, and Cristi has contributed a script to do it 
that is in http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd-installer
Mar 24 2010
parent reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright Wrote:


 Jesse Phillips wrote:

 I would like to announce DDebber.
 
 http://dsource.org/projects/ddebber


 
 
 Looks like we have an embarrassment of riches here. Jordi Sayol i Salomó has 
 sent me a shell script to do it, and Cristi has contributed a script to do it 
 that is in http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd-installer


I know of dmd-installer, at least as a Windows installer. The README in rpm
explains how to build a DEB?

One thing DDebber is going for is building a package that could be accepted in
the main Debian repo if the license didn't prevent this. I really want  a
libphobos which is needed when it becomes a shared library (could actually be
in the official repositories when that happens :)

If you have a script you are happy with and don't want to go the repository
route, I'll see if I can get the Tango repository to distribute it once Tango
is also packaged.
Mar 24 2010
parent reply Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
Jesse Phillips wrote:


 Walter Bright Wrote:
 

 Jesse Phillips wrote:

 I would like to announce DDebber.
 
 http://dsource.org/projects/ddebber


 
 
 Looks like we have an embarrassment of riches here. Jordi Sayol i Salom�
 has sent me a shell script to do it, and Cristi has contributed a script
 to do it that is in http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd-installer


 
 I know of dmd-installer, at least as a Windows installer. The README in rpm
 explains how to build a DEB?
 
 One thing DDebber is going for is building a package that could be accepted
 in the main Debian repo if the license didn't prevent this. I really want 
 a libphobos which is needed when it becomes a shared library (could
 actually be in the official repositories when that happens :)
 
 If you have a script you are happy with and don't want to go the repository
 route, I'll see if I can get the Tango repository to distribute it once
 Tango is also packaged.


You could try getting LDC with Tango into debian, there are no license 
problems with them.
Mar 25 2010
parent reply Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
Lutger wrote:


 You could try getting LDC with Tango into debian, there are no license 
 problems with them. 


My goal isn't exactly to get anything into the official repo. This is my
first time really doing packaging and I'd like to figure out what is
best for D. The conflicts between v1, v2, Phobos, and Tango coupled
with the packages depending on one or another, or any combination...
makes packaging very unclear.
Mar 25 2010
parent Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
Jesse Phillips wrote:


 Lutger wrote:
 

 You could try getting LDC with Tango into debian, there are no license
 problems with them.


 
 My goal isn't exactly to get anything into the official repo. This is my
 first time really doing packaging and I'd like to figure out what is
 best for D. The conflicts between v1, v2, Phobos, and Tango coupled
 with the packages depending on one or another, or any combination...
 makes packaging very unclear.


Yes and that's exactly why this is a fine project, though getting in an 
official repo will be extra valuable. I might attempt it for fedora when, if 
ever, I get to finish my current projects. 

Is there any userbase for D1 without Tango at the moment? I'd think there is 
only the combination D1 plus Tango with gdc/ldc/dmd, and D2 with dmd getting 
any use to speak of. dmd is not redistributable and ldc seems to be more 
actively developed, so that's why I suggested that combo.
Mar 25 2010
prev sibling next sibling parent Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D gmail.com> writes:
DDebber can now be download as a pre-compiled binary. Those that wish to
distribute packages using this program should only need to change a few values
in configuration/dmd/values.ini such as name and email.

http://dsource.org/projects/ddebber


Walter,
    You are welcome to start using the program if you wish, I will continue to
add improvements to the 1.0 branch which will concentrate on creating only a
single package for phobos and DMD.

------------
This program will generate a .deb package from a Digital Mars zip file. Two
packages are generated, an i386 version and amd64. The amd64 packages does not
contain a 64bit compiler, but depends on the needed 32bit libraries.
Apr 01 2010
prev sibling parent Bernard Helyer <b.helyer gmail.com> writes:
Hi,

I just tried to install 2.043 using this program. It generated two 
Debian packages one ostensibly for i386 and the other for amd64. 
However, when I tried to install the i386 package using

	sudo gdebi dmd_2.043-1_i386.deb

I got the following:

	This package is uninstallable
	Wrong architecture 'amd64'

(The same for installing the amd64 package, obviously! *g*)



-Bernard.
Apr 09 2010