Setup Debian packaging #252
Comments
|
Oh and another question since I'm not too familiar with the Python ecosystem: would it make sense to switch from |
|
Just a +1 here - it's a giant shame Debian still has hamster-applet. Especially since the PPA build installs fine but doesn't seem to run under Debian (which, granted, it's not supposed to in the first place). Still, proper Debian packaging would be mighty nice, so thank you for this!!! |
|
I'm still interested in Hamster (still using it every day), so I'll be happy to help out. It might be a while before I will find some time, though :-) I'm not too familiar with Python packaging either, so not sure about |
|
I just upgraded from Debian stable to the latest Ubuntu where the legacy hamster no longer works, so I have some incentive in getting the new version working and uploaded to Debian. Not in time for Buster (already in freeze), but probably the next version. I'm looking at what's needed right now, also looking at the PPA packaging from Dylan McCall. |
|
If the old version (1.04) does not work at all, then the recommended course of action is to use the last release. The changes to the packaging are quite light, here is an example. |
|
@ederag Thanks for the additional example. Wrt to waf vs setuptools, is there any ticket tracking this plan? AFAICS one problem with the current waf packaging is that waf is outdated and only runs on python2, so it should either be updated, or we should switch to e.g. setuptools (or perhaps one of these fancy new packaging tools that replace setuptools, such as poetry or flit using a pyproject.toml file rather that setup.py? Haven't looked at them closely, though). Also: AFAIU, the main code supports python3 now (just waf is python2 only), but does it still support python2? Or should we just focus on python3-only now? |
|
Here is a new issue to discuss the
Indeed, |
|
It's a shame to see all the pieces there but they are either slowly falling apart (Hamster legacy) or haven't been put together yet (Hamster rewrite). Switching from waf to setuptools just to be able to build a package for the legacy code path seems like a big undertaking. If it had just been some mind-numbing task I would have been able to find the time for it, but digging into waf, setuptools and deb building isn't something trivial. Sorry. As an intermediate step, would simply replacing the files installed by hamster-applet_2.91.3+git20120514.b9fec3e1-1ubuntu2_all.deb manually with the current legacy code do the trick? |
|
Per #369 maybe https://github.com/projecthamster/hamster/wiki/Hamster-2.x-on-Xubuntu-18.04 could help @matthijskooijman? (Sorry if it doesn't.) Debian buster (Debian 10) is now stable. The current testing distribution is "bullseye". So am I right to understand that, if someone packages Hamster for Debian, it'll go first to "unstable" (sid) and then to bullseye, but will not graduate to being available for buster, because buster is an LTS? |
Nope, that's a bit of a hack that should not go into official packages. However, work by @ederag at #399 is going to help with that. Once he publishes that, I'm gonna go and have a stab at packaging it.
Correct (though "because it is an LTS" does not really mean anything, since all Debian releases are "LTS" in the sense that once out, they only get minor updates and bugfixes, not big updates (except for sid, which will always be unstable :-p). If we get this packaged in the near future, it will end up in Bullseye only. However, it's likely that the Bullseye version can be installed in Buster, and if not, we could put a modified version in backports probably. |
except someone creates a package for backports. (as @matthijskooijman already mentioned)
great! 👍 |
|
Informations for packaging can be found in this comment. v3.0 is almost there. |
|
Feature freeze August 22. |
|
Thanks Gerald. Too late to be in a hurry, good ! |
|
#565 will be merged tomorrow, it contains relevant information for packagers. |
|
v3.0-rc1 released, 8-9 days before ubuntu LTS freeze. |
|
FYI, I'm still motivated to make a Debian package for Hamster. However:
I also noticed the Debian does not really like waf as a build system, since it contains packed up source files (which is a bit like a compiled binary). It can be used, but then I'll have to unpack waf before creating a source tarball (unless we do that in the source repo here already?). |
|
Thanks for the reply.
|
sed -i '/^#==>$/,$d' waf This helps debian packaging projecthamster#252 (comment) and seems harmless. Signatures are checked once at waf update. https://waf.io/book/#_getting_the_waf_file
sed -i '/^#==>$/,$d' waf This helps debian packaging projecthamster#252 (comment) and seems harmless. Signatures are checked once at waf update. https://waf.io/book/#_getting_the_waf_file
@matthijskooijman Thanks a lot for the information. Fixed by #569 ? |
|
Looks good! Did not realize the unpacked files were in the repository already, so just stripping the binary stuff from waf indeed seems sufficient. Thanks! |
|
Anybody already started on debian packaging? We (me, some colleagues) might be able to help - depending on the need of our users at work. So please, if there are already some efforts, put a link here so we won't duplicate efforts. |
|
I have a start. Still needs some cleanup, but I shoudl be able to share something. Give me a few days to push this out somewhere. |
|
@hstock, I've pushed out my work so far here: https://salsa.debian.org/projecthamster-team/hamster-time-tracker, with my list of things still needed here: https://salsa.debian.org/projecthamster-team/hamster-time-tracker/-/issues/1 Do you have any experience with Debian packaging? Any of you a registered Debian Developer? I'm enlisted as a Debian Maintainer myself, meaning I'll have to ask a DD for an initial review and upload of a new package (but I can upload directly afterward the first version). The packaging I did now uses Let me know what you think and if you have anything to contribute (we can continue on the Salsa issue, or here if you prefer). |
|
ok, I'll have a look. I am maintaining two packages on Debian but am neither a listed DD nor DM. We could also think about involving PAPT (Python Application Packaging Team). I think it is best to continue on Salsa - leaving this comment here for future reference for other users. |
|
Thanks @matthijskooijman for your efforts at Debianization. It would be great if we had a daily build PPA and recipe. I've done this a number of times before, but I'm less experienced with Python build environment tools than I am with native code and the Autotools. |
|
Great people* have uploaded hamster-time-tracker to Debian: https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/hamster-time-tracker Maybe that issue can be closed?
|
What problem would a PPA solve? Having the package in Debian repositories gives stronger authentication than a PPA and via Debian backports also recent versions can be brought to people running Debian stable. |
Yes!
It could make it easier to test the git version rather than just released versions, and/or make it easier to use newer hamster versions on older Ubuntu (and sometimes also Debian) releases. So I can see some merit in that, but I won't be coming around to setting this up anytime soon. If there's interest, maybe a separate issue could be created for this. |
Last week I felt whimsical and released a preliminary 2.0-rc1 release of Hamster, along with a very basic Debian package built with
checkinstall. So now I'd like to get the ball rolling to get proper packaging of Hamster going again, at least for Debian/Ubuntu. Any help is appreciated since I only have limited experience, but I'd be curious to learn more about it.@matthijskooijman previously offered his support, but that was almost a year ago so I can understand if priorities have changed ;-) Is there anything I can build on, or would it make more sense to start from scratch?
@tbaugis do you have any other contacts from previous maintainers of Debian/Ubuntu packages?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: