pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] build webapp packages

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] build webapp packages
From: Martins Innus <minnus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 15:29:48 -0400
Cc: pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <399028968.10743381.1430435512674.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <55428B32.5040301@xxxxxxxxxxx> <399028968.10743381.1430435512674.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
Nathan,

On 4/30/15 7:11 PM, Nathan Scott wrote:
Currently, the only package building we do for external trees like webjs
is via fedora.spec - which is fairly limiting, and something I'd like to
start to tackle.  We are seeing increasing numbers of external trees (eg
vector, webjs, parfait, pcp2pdf, pcp-cpp-pmda, ...), and a more general
solution to help build packages for those projects too would be great.

Yeah, that would be very helpful.


expected. pcp-webapi builds fine. Do I need to copy the appropriate bits
from fedora.spec into pcp.spec.in?
Hmm, you know, I think we can solve this more easily for Makepkgs builds -
how about this:

- allow people to optionally drop in certain external source tarballs in a
preset location  (say, below build/tar/)

- configure.ac looks for any external source tarballs below build/tar and,
if present, these can flip switches in the build and incorporate those
external sources into the build (bit like fedora.spec does).

- add to pcp.spec.in (and debian/* builds) conditional code for the new
packges, along the lines of the @enable_python3@ guard around "python3-pcp".

- hey presto, we'd be able to have optionally built packages for any of the
external projects - and a handy generalised solution going forward I think.

Sounds OK to me.

Thanks

Martins

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [pcp] build webapp packages, Martins Innus <=