[haiku-development] Re: Package Building and Beta1
- From: "Adrien Destugues" <pulkomandy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 07:40:35 +0000
27 juillet 2017 09:18 "Julian Harnath" <julian.harnath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit:
Hey,
On 26.07.2017 15:39, kallisti5 wrote:
As part of working towards the release, I created a http and https
server for
the package builder artifacts:
https://eu.hpkg.haiku-os.org
The idea is, long term we'll have us.hpkg.haiku-os.org, etc.
Well that's nice, but unfortunately still leaves a lot of things in the dark.
What branch is this
repo built from? What are the remaining problems? And all the other questions
I raised in my
previous mails in this thread.
Look, this repo building thing is something we all care about because it has
been blocking for so
long. It would be really nice if those who work on it would be a bit more
open with information on
it. Might also inspire more people to help if they simply *knew* what is left
to do. And not just
on IRC, which is too ephemeral for this important issue.
However, looking at the forum, there is still serious disagreement over the
way to go forward with
the repo building infrastructure. Before that is sorted out, and a generally
agreeable solution or
compromise is found, I think we should not push forward with a release.
I don't care which solution is used eventually, as long as I'm not the one
doing the work. This doesn't matter, if at the end we get a repo we can use. So
I'll let kallisti5 and waddlesplash handle this with whatever solution they
think is suitable. As long as it doesn't involve patching the recipes to
workaround the tool limitations. I have my own preferences, but I'm not part of
the sysadmin team and I don't want to be. So let them use their favorite tool.
What is important to me, however, is deciding which branch to use as a basis
for our release. I have set up the "release" branch for this purpose, with the
goal of staying close to what we have in the repos and is known to work. This
is the short path to "we need a release soon". I think this is where we should
focus our effort now, leaving a more complete repo for later or maybe to a
3rd-party effort, which was the original idea (Haiku should provide a repo with
only system package, their dependencies, and what we ship on the release CD,
basically - everything else is up for others to build).
But, there are at least two diverging efforts going on:
1) Korli is using the 201xQy branches, which are snapshots of the master tree
at reguular intervals, with backported fixes.
2) Using the master directly, as is done with the current Kitchen setup I
think. My opinion is that this will never lead to a repo we can use to base the
beta on. There are new recipes breaking things faster than we can fix them.
I think 1 is sane, but may need a lot more QA (because there are more packages
and also because there are a lot of updates). The release branch is using the
same package set we are using currently, and as such should not trigger too
much regressions. Which means we can switch to it and then move on to the next
steps of the release - not spend another two years fixing bugs.
However, as 1) is in production in the x86_64 branch already, we could use it
for the x86_64 release. This means x86_64 would get a lot more packages than
x86_gcc2, but I'm fine with that, at least for beta1. We can experiment with
switching x86_gcc2 to 1), after the release and for Beta2.
--
Adrien.
Other related posts:
