search

open-iscsi / configshell-fb

configshell with additional modifications, see README
Apache License 2.0
28 stars 37 forks source link

fix version in package builds #8

Closed JonnyJD closed 11 years ago

JonnyJD commented 11 years ago

Without this fix at least dpkg complains about the version not starting with a number (starting with "v").

This should fix #7.

JonnyJD commented 11 years ago

This looks like it is fixed for rtslib-fb already (in a different way), but targetcli-fb should also receive this fix.

There are possibly more problems though. I didn't check a complete build on a debian machine yet (or trying a chroot build).

JonnyJD commented 11 years ago

@agrover: I did a bit of testing. There are other issues with the package. Meaning: it currently still doesn't build.

For one the current build doesn't seem to work anymore since we switched to using setuptools. Certainly fixable, I have it working in a local branch.

Changing the package name to "configshell-fb" would make sense, since this is different and incompatible with the original configshell (as far as I remembered), which again runs under the name "configshell" in the Debian-based repositories. Changing the maintainer for the package is also something we should do. I would just set your email, since you are the maintainer of the repository. Some fixes in the Makefile, though simply changing $NAME doesn't work.

Then we do need to update the packaging to remove the epydoc dependency there.

Finally it might be nice if python3 packages would also be built. At least for that step we should rewrite the packaging to use dh_python. I didn't test that yet, but I have another package where I have done that.

It is also an option to remove packaging from this repository, since maintaining packages for different distributions and maintaining the software are separate issues. I can update the deb packaging, but I can't really maintain them, since I am not a Debian or Debian-based user.

Most of that isn't specific to configshell, but should also be done for rtslib and targetcli.

agrover commented 11 years ago

@JonnyJD yeah I'm not in a position to maintain Debian packaging either. I'm happy to merge fixes from people who want this in-tree. The in-tree RPM packaging stuff is also not used by me (in my Fedora packager role) but somebody did complain when it broke...

Maybe we don't remove them, but document their lack of support and that contributions are welcome?

JonnyJD commented 11 years ago

Sounds like a plan. Are you okay with renaming the deb packages to "-fb" and changing you to be maintainer of the packages (mainly so Jerome doesn't get bug reports for them or similar)?

agrover commented 11 years ago

sure.