On 10/23/15 13:50, Steve Dougherty wrote: > On 10/22/2015 06:09 PM, dean wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I have been hacking on the freenet debian package for a little while and >> I think I have gotten it up to a usable stage. Id like some feedback if >> someone would like to browse/test it please? > > Sure! I'm glad to hear you got this working again. Hopefully we'll be > able to start publishing it this time around. > > From looking at the diff: > > * The contrib submodule path should lose the "-staging" too.
Fixed. > * GWT continues to be painful. What is it required for? IIRC it's the > progress loading images, which are cool, but also kinda abandoned. > Maybe someone will be interested in rescuing them during the > hackathon? Yes! I'm not at all happy including the jars like that, it was a bit of a last resort so that the build process will work for everybody. I need to do some digging here, hopefully the hackathon can purge it forever. > * The change to the seednodes update makes things end up in a different > directory: it removes one cd but not the matching cd -. Nice one, Fixed. Also went back to timestamping, much better, thanks!. > * I don't think v29 is preferable to contrib master. master is split > into multiple jars, which is better and I'm hoping we can move to it. My thoughts on this were: The debian package should use exactly the same code as everybody else does. Isn't contrib master considered untested? I planned to trial contrib master in branch until freenet used contrib master too. Am I being silly? Should I just use master? > * Does the wrapper not work with the packaged Debian version? In my > experience it'll sometimes work despite a mismatch. It appears to work. > I don't know if that's unstable. Me either, that's the problem. The wrapper warning scared me off: WARNING - The Wrapper jar file currently in use is version "3.3.1" while the version of the Wrapper which launched this JVM is "3.5.26". The Wrapper may appear to work correctly but some features may not function correctly. This configuration has not been tested and is not supported. This could still be a problem. It should be fairly trivial to update the wrapper freenet uses shouldn't it? Maybe I'll look at this later, or when the build system gets upgraded. > * Why not depend on Bouncy Castle? I'd rather make a Debian package for > 1.52 and use that. Me too. The problem is in the making of the package. I'm subscribed to the debian-java mail list and there has been mention of updating it, but who knows when. I was trying to make this package usable right now and depending on an old lib freenet will refuse to use is just a waste of disk space. > * Why is extlib.wrapper.suppress in contrib.override.properties changed > to false? Because of he wrapper version mismatch I referred to above, debian/rules now builds wrapper.jar and includes it in /usr/share/java/freenet ( so as to not confuse it with the /usr/share/java/wrapper.jar from service-wrapper in the repo). Its a bit of a mess I know... In most of the decisions I made here I tried to take the safe option to try to minimise debian only bugs and reduce workload and maintenance so this package can be usable for a long time. This is still a work in progress. A freenet debian repo would be nice too so I can just add http://freenetproject.org/debian to my sources.list does anyone think that could be possible? I understand we are still a while away form that stage but a man can dream cant he?. > Thanks, > Steve Thanks for your review! Do you think you will get a chance to build and test the package too? I understand your very busy so its ok if you cant, maybe someone else can?. Thanks again, Dean.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
