[Distutils] [zc.buildout] buildout to .deb package
ziade.tarek at gmail.com
Wed Feb 18 00:48:59 CET 2009
2009/2/18 Andrew Straw <strawman at astraw.com>:
> There is no need to email me separately. I usually lurk here...
> If you're trying to do package management on Debian, I'd suggest using
> the Debian system rather than trying to invent your own. (I am reading
> between the lines here by noting that you are not talking about building
> debian source packages, but only .debs. Please correct me if that
> interpretation is wrong.)
But note that being able to build .deb packages from another system
than debian could
be a great feature when doable.
> I personally don't see the point in creating .deb packages without
> actually generating a .dsc first -- you're just going to avoid Debian
> machinery that helps make sure your .debs are OK. Furthermore, you have
> some chance that your .dsc packages will work across debian/ubuntu
> versions, whereas that chance is much reduced if you're using pure .deb
> packages. The "benefit" of a straight .deb builder is that it could be
> incredibly dumb and just build raw archives that get unpacked. I imagine
> that would bypass Debian policy by unpacking everything in
> /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages. (Nowadays, the python-support
> machinery in Debian unpacks files to /usr/share/pyshared and them
> symlinks them across acceptable Python versions' site-package
> directories). Finally, you'll miss out on all the script installation
> and so on.
> So, to me, the interesting discussion is not about auto-generation of
> .debs. It's about auto-generation of .dscs. Those can trivially be
> turned into .debs, anyway.
Ok. I am clueless here. I need to read some documentation on my side,
But if this is comparable to the RPM spec files, it sounds like
a good approach.
What about two commands then ?
- sdist_deb (which is a sdist call + the .dsc file generation)
- bdist_deb (which is a sdist_deb call + the creation of the .deb)
>> I can probably include such a command in Distutils for 2.7 if I get
>> help from Debian specialists
> In case the above arguments persue you to reconsider something like
> bdist_deb in favor of something like sdist_dsc, may I mention that this
> is already a distutils command installed by stdeb?
> However, I don't think stdeb is anywhere near ready for inclusion in the
> stdlib. But I'd welcome help!
Well, looking at the sdist_dsc code, it is based on setuptools, so I
doubt it could
be integrated easily.
That said, I don't think the integration of a new command in Distutils itself,
is a huge amount of work, as long as it does one single thing.
If we could work on a simple isolated command
that builds the .dsc, then on another command that creates the .deb
out of it, it could
be the right approach imho.
What do you think ?
More information about the Distutils-SIG