Nathan Scott wrote: > Luc's changes will allow the PCP source to be built as part > of the Debian build process, conform to Debian policy, and > hence allow the PCP package to become an official part of > Debian (you need to learn some more about Debian before you > can understand what you really asked there, Mark ;-) Yes, you're right. I haven't yet proposed my package for official inclusion for two reasons: 1) I haven't asked your permission yet :-) 2) I'm at 50% sure, that it will be rejected because PCP in its actual form doesn't respect some of the FHS. To be accepted, a package has to follow some very strict rules. One of them is to respect the Linux Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/), and the Linux Standard Base (http://www.linuxbase.org/). I see that SGI is a member of LSB :-) Some files are misplaced (from my interpretation of the FHS). These are the files that I'm sure need to be moved: - The documentation should be in /usr/share/doc/pcp, not /usr/doc/pcp. - The demos and examples should be in /usr/share/doc/pcp too, not /usr/share/pcp/*. - The man pages should be in /usr/share/man/* These are the files locations that MAY pass: - Datas for pcp should be in /var/lib/pcp, not /var/pcp. I say 'may', because I know only ONE package that doesn't follow this, which is Samba. But I think it's a mistake. - Configuration files (currently /var/pcp/config) should be in /etc/pcp. I made some of the modifications (man pages, docs) at compile time of the debian package (some are even done automatically!), so it's not too hard to maintain this. Many debian packages are separated in two parts, one part for users, and one part for developers (foobar.deb and foobar-dev.deb). The goal of this is to allow someone to install the minimum of what he needs. The developer part would include the libraries, the .h files, etc. For PCP, I don't think it's possible to do this. Files are too dependend on each other, and the current way of compiling/installing pmdas is really cool :-) > Luc, do you intend to put your (very cool, thank you so > much!) pcp & pcpmon packages into unstable? I will propose the pcp & pcpmon packages as soon as I have your authorization (SGI's & Michal's) to do so. I wanted to wait for the version Mark talked about releasing this week, and I wanted to test the package a little more before proposing it. It has to be perfect ! > I have been working with some Debian folk on getting the > XFS user commands Debian-packaged - it may be useful to > look thru the way I addressed this there (those tools are > packaged in a very similar way to PCP) - I'd be interested > in your thoughts on that too - see the xfs homepage on oss > and cmd/xfs/tools/debian + cmd/xfs/build/deb. Ok, I'll look at it. > You also don't need the DESTDIR kludge in all the Makefiles > since the pcp build can be configure'd to use alternate paths > already (I haven't looked at your latest pcp changes to see > whether they still do this, I'm very busy on other stuff at > the moment unfortunately). You're right, I discovered the DIST_ROOT variable last week :-) No more any modification to all of the Makefiles, it was such a pain !!! Luc Ps: I attached a screenshot of debconf at work, when installing PCP, for people that don't use Debian :-) -- Luc Stepniewski <lstep@xxxxxxxxxxx> <http://lstep.free.fr/> Adequat - Securite, Linux Public key: <http://lstep.free.fr/pubkey.txt> Key D93B2D2D fingerprint = 49 00 CC D1 69 03 E2 94 C8 78 ED 3C 75 89 A8 DE
|
