From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr•org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Cc: Greg Troxel <gdt@work•lexort.com>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Linux packaging letter
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 23:45:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201307232345.37289.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <smumwpcg8sw.fsf@linuxpal.mit.edu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2556 bytes --]
On Tuesday, July 23, 2013 11:23:27 PM Greg Troxel wrote:
> I find it interesting that this is a "linux packaging letter". How much
> of this applies to pkgsrc, FreeBSD ports, OpenBSD ports, and other
> non-Linux packaging systems (pkgsrc supports Linux as on of 20 operating
> systems, but is not a "Linux packaging system")?
It was written with bitcoind/Bitcoin-Qt in mind, which don't work on BSD. :p
> Is the repeatable build infrastructure portable (to any reasonable
> mostly-POSIX-compliant system, with gcc or clang)? I have the vague
> impression it's Ubuntu only, but I am very unclear on this point. How
> does this repeatableness interact with building for multiple operating
> systems and cpu types (say 20 OS, with typically 3 versions of the OS
> for each, with 1-20 cpu types per OS, for a cross-product of perhaps 200
> combinations)?
It should be portable to other systems, though hasn't been done yet.
Would be nice if the concepts it uses could be integrated into the package-
building systems.
> Requiring precise library depdendencies is quite awkward. Certainly
> requiring new enough to avoid known bugs is understandable, but that
> should be caught at configure time and fail.
The problem is that we require bugs. That is, if your library has those bugs
fixed, you have introduced a security vulnerability.
> It seems like a bug that the package will build on BE systems and then
> fail tests. If it's known not to be ok, it seems that absent some
> configure-time flag the build should fail.
There is no configure-time for this node software yet. The autoconf-based one
in the works *does* make this check, however.
> Asking people not to patch should mean willingnesss to make accomodation
> in the master sources for build issues for multiple packaging systems.
> I haven't gotten around to packaging this for pkgsrc - so far I only
> have the energy to lurk (due to too many things on the todo list). But
> I often find that some changes are needed. If you're willing (in
> theory) to add in configure flags to control build behavior (in a way
> that you can audit and decide is safe), that's great, and of course we
> can discuss an actual situation when one gets figured out.
The review process is very slow and strict, but that is because of the same
reasons it isn't safe to distribute patched versions in general. Merging your
patches to mainline is not only a good idea, but it helps to ensure they get
the necessary testing needed to be safe.
Luke
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 1530 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-23 23:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-23 20:01 Mike Hearn
2013-07-23 20:14 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-23 20:32 ` Mike Hearn
2013-07-23 20:50 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-28 18:21 ` John Dillon
2013-07-23 22:02 ` Scott Howard
2013-07-23 22:26 ` Luke-Jr
2013-07-24 3:00 ` Scott Howard
2013-07-24 1:45 ` Douglas Huff
2013-07-24 2:27 ` Scott Howard
2013-07-24 3:54 ` [Bitcoin-development] Endianness (was: Linux packaging letter) Wendell
2013-07-24 4:03 ` Luke-Jr
2013-07-24 4:07 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-24 4:09 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-23 22:33 ` [Bitcoin-development] Linux packaging letter Pieter Wuille
2013-07-23 23:23 ` Greg Troxel
2013-07-23 23:45 ` Luke-Jr [this message]
2013-07-24 0:50 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-24 2:35 ` zooko
2013-07-24 3:19 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-24 8:28 ` Mike Hearn
2013-07-24 13:52 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-07-24 15:32 ` zooko
2013-07-24 19:35 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-07-24 16:01 ` zooko
2013-07-27 0:45 ` Greg Troxel
2013-07-27 0:43 ` Greg Troxel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201307232345.37289.luke@dashjr.org \
--to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=gdt@work$(echo .)lexort.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox