librelist archives

« back to archive

A few questions regarding packaging unreleased software

A few questions regarding packaging unreleased software

From:
Luis Felipe Strano Moraes
Date:
2011-11-03 @ 13:01
Hello guys,

I've started packaging the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries, current work
(reviews appreciated) is here:
https://github.com/mxcl/homebrew/pull/8342

The other libraries in the series now require stuff that is not yet
released in order to properly work with MacOSX. I could go with adding X11
support as a requirement, but I honestly prefer to keep this Cocoa only and
help with the implementation effort upstream. But the libraries packaged so
far do work without any sort of patching, so I'd like to ask:

1) Is there a way I can enforce dependency on --HEAD installs? As in, if
package B is being installed with package A as a dependency, can B
explicitly list a dependency on A having been compiled from HEAD?
2) When packaging the new libs, should I put only the HEAD url or also
regular packages? Regular packages will compile fine, but they will not
work properly, so thats why I ask. I can already put the package there and
just update after the next release which includes the fixes, but not sure
if this is the "right way".

Best regards,
Luis Felipe


-- 
Luís Felipe Strano Moraes
http://www.strano.org

Re: [homebrew] A few questions regarding packaging unreleased software

From:
Mike McQuaid
Date:
2011-11-03 @ 13:56
On 3 Nov 2011, at 13:01, Luis Felipe Strano Moraes wrote:

> 1) Is there a way I can enforce dependency on --HEAD installs? As in, if
package B is being installed with package A as a dependency, can B 
explicitly list a dependency on A having been compiled from HEAD?

Not yet unfortunately other than manually checking in the formula and 
throwing an error if not found/

> 2) When packaging the new libs, should I put only the HEAD url or also 
regular packages? Regular packages will compile fine, but they will not 
work properly, so thats why I ask. I can already put the package there and
just update after the next release which includes the fixes, but not sure 
if this is the "right way".

Normally both. If the regular packages are useless on OSX though, just HEAD.

--
Mike McQuaid
http://mikemcquaid.com

Re: [homebrew] A few questions regarding packaging unreleased software

From:
Luis Felipe Strano Moraes
Date:
2011-11-03 @ 18:31
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mike McQuaid <mike@mikemcquaid.com> wrote:

>
> On 3 Nov 2011, at 13:01, Luis Felipe Strano Moraes wrote:
>
> > 1) Is there a way I can enforce dependency on --HEAD installs? As in, if
> package B is being installed with package A as a dependency, can B
> explicitly list a dependency on A having been compiled from HEAD?
>
> Not yet unfortunately other than manually checking in the formula and
> throwing an error if not found/
>

Hmm, how would manually checking the formula work? I'd actually need to
inspect the installed version on the Cellar, correct? That seems to hackish
for me, I'll just package HEAD and add the releases when they become
available (shouldn't take longer than 3 weeks).


>
> > 2) When packaging the new libs, should I put only the HEAD url or also
> regular packages? Regular packages will compile fine, but they will not
> work properly, so thats why I ask. I can already put the package there and
> just update after the next release which includes the fixes, but not sure
> if this is the "right way".
>
> Normally both. If the regular packages are useless on OSX though, just
> HEAD.
>

Ok, thanks.

As I said, the three libs that are on the pull request are correct right
now, so I would really appreciate if someone could merge them. I tried
pinging around IRC but couldn't find reviewers there :)

Best regards,
Luis Felipe



>
> --
> Mike McQuaid
> http://mikemcquaid.com
>
>


-- 
Luís Felipe Strano Moraes
http://www.strano.org

Re: [homebrew] A few questions regarding packaging unreleased software

From:
Luis Felipe Strano Moraes
Date:
2011-11-07 @ 11:17
Hey guys,

can I get a merge at https://github.com/mxcl/homebrew/pull/8342 ?

Best regards,
Luis Felipe


On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Luis Felipe Strano Moraes <
luis.strano@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mike McQuaid <mike@mikemcquaid.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> On 3 Nov 2011, at 13:01, Luis Felipe Strano Moraes wrote:
>>
>> > 1) Is there a way I can enforce dependency on --HEAD installs? As in,
>> if package B is being installed with package A as a dependency, can B
>> explicitly list a dependency on A having been compiled from HEAD?
>>
>> Not yet unfortunately other than manually checking in the formula and
>> throwing an error if not found/
>>
>
> Hmm, how would manually checking the formula work? I'd actually need to
> inspect the installed version on the Cellar, correct? That seems to hackish
> for me, I'll just package HEAD and add the releases when they become
> available (shouldn't take longer than 3 weeks).
>
>
>>
>> > 2) When packaging the new libs, should I put only the HEAD url or also
>> regular packages? Regular packages will compile fine, but they will not
>> work properly, so thats why I ask. I can already put the package there and
>> just update after the next release which includes the fixes, but not sure
>> if this is the "right way".
>>
>> Normally both. If the regular packages are useless on OSX though, just
>> HEAD.
>>
>
> Ok, thanks.
>
> As I said, the three libs that are on the pull request are correct right
> now, so I would really appreciate if someone could merge them. I tried
> pinging around IRC but couldn't find reviewers there :)
>
> Best regards,
> Luis Felipe
>
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Mike McQuaid
>> http://mikemcquaid.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Luís Felipe Strano Moraes
> http://www.strano.org
>



-- 
Luís Felipe Strano Moraes
http://www.strano.org