LDC blacklisted in Ubuntu

[H. S. Teoh]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 07:14:12PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2012, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:58:08PM -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I don't know what's involved in getting built-packages into the
> > > various distributions.  I suspect that a number of them prefer to
> > > be built by their own automation from original (or forked)
> > > sources.  I'd be happy to engage with the appropriate people to
> > > explore ways to work together in this space.
> > [...]
> > 
> > For Debian, the process is relatively simple:
> > 
> > 1) Create a debian/ subdir in the source tree, with appropriate
> >    control files (for existing packages, this has already been done)
> >    a) Update debian/changelog to reflect the new version number.
> >    b) Adjust any necessary dependencies, etc., in debian/control.
> > 
> > 2) Build the package by running 'dpkg-buildpackage ...' in the
> >    source tree. This creates a bunch of files (including the binary
> >    .deb) in the parent directory.
> > 
> > 3) [Optional] Preferably, test the .deb to make sure it doesn't cause
> >    massive system breakage.
> > 
> > 4) Upload the generated package files in the parent directory by the
> >    build process, either by sending it to a sponsor or uploading it
> >    directly to the upload queue if you have upload access. The
> >    dupload script automatically determines which file(s) should be
> >    uploaded.
> > 
> > Once the package is uploaded successfully, the autobuilder
> > infrastructure can be used to build the package for the umpteen
> > architectures that Debian supports.
> > 
> > IIRC, once the package gets into the Debian archive it will
> > eventually find its way into Ubuntu (and possibly the other Debian
> > derivatives).
> 
> That works well for packages which are single source tree.  The
> current dmd, druntime, phobos, d-programming-language, tools
> separation makes that a little more challenging to put together, but
> not a lot.  It's probably worth doing regardless.  I realize that gdc
> and ldc are both in better shape in this area already.

You can always have separate packages that depend on each other.


> #4 there implies it's a source package, though I could be mis-interpreting 
> you.  Is there a path for externally built binary packages?  That's fairly 
> counter to the general distribution philosophy for most of them, so I'm 
> giong to guess no.
[...]

As Iain said, you could follow the path of flash-installer-nonfree,
which just contains a script that downloads the binaries from some URL
upon installation. Of course, you'd still have to make sure that the
downloaded binaries are installed in the correct places[1].

[1] See: http://wiki.debian.org/FilesystemHierarchyStandard


T

-- 
INTEL = Only half of "intelligence".