Обсуждение: Packaging of 9.2-1001 source tarball
I find that postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz doesn't contain a version-numbered top-level directory --- unpacking it just litters your current directory with a bunch of files. I hope this is a mistake and not new packaging policy. regards, tom lane
Yes, it is a mistake.
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
Mine
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
I find that postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz doesn't contain a
version-numbered top-level directory --- unpacking it just litters
your current directory with a bunch of files. I hope this is a
mistake and not new packaging policy.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
And the new pgjdbc-build.sh script I sent you Dave should now handle that process for you in creating that tar.gz file with the given input version number as a basis for the name. Use the -s switch to create the source in addition to the standard jars. The top level directory should be automatically created. If there are problems with the script please let me know. danap. Dave Cramer wrote: > Yes, it is a mistake. > > Mine > > Dave > > Dave Cramer > > dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca > http://www.credativ.ca > > > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us > <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: > > I find that postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz doesn't contain a > version-numbered top-level directory --- unpacking it just litters > your current directory with a bunch of files. I hope this is a > mistake and not new packaging policy. > > regards, tom lane > -- > Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org > <mailto:pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
Hi Dana,
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
Just looking at your build script with the source output. Why didn't you use git archive to accomplish most of this ?
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:01 PM, dmp <danap@ttc-cmc.net> wrote:
And the new pgjdbc-build.sh script I sent you Dave should now handle
that process for you in creating that tar.gz file with the given input
version number as a basis for the name. Use the -s switch to create
the source in addition to the standard jars. The top level directory
should be automatically created. If there are problems with the
script please let me know.
danap.
Dave Cramer wrote:Yes, it is a mistake.
Mine
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us<mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:<mailto:pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>)
I find that postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz doesn't contain a
version-numbered top-level directory --- unpacking it just litters
your current directory with a bunch of files. I hope this is a
mistake and not new packaging policy.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
Tom,
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
I've fixed the tar file.
Thanks,
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
Hi Dana,Just looking at your build script with the source output. Why didn't you use git archive to accomplish most of this ?DaveOn Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:01 PM, dmp <danap@ttc-cmc.net> wrote:And the new pgjdbc-build.sh script I sent you Dave should now handle
that process for you in creating that tar.gz file with the given input
version number as a basis for the name. Use the -s switch to create
the source in addition to the standard jars. The top level directory
should be automatically created. If there are problems with the
script please let me know.
danap.
Dave Cramer wrote:Yes, it is a mistake.
Mine
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us<mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:<mailto:pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>)
I find that postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz doesn't contain a
version-numbered top-level directory --- unpacking it just litters
your current directory with a bunch of files. I hope this is a
mistake and not new packaging policy.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
I guess I will have to look up what git archive is to answer that question. I just starting using git in the last week or so for the current project I'm working on. danap. Dave Cramer wrote: > Hi Dana, > > Just looking at your build script with the source output. Why didn't you > use git archive to accomplish most of this ? > > Dave > > Dave Cramer > > dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca > http://www.credativ.ca
Ok I will review and update the script tomorrow. danap. Dave Cramer wrote: > Dana, > > This command > > git archive --prefix=postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src/ --format=tar.gz -o > postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz REL9_2_STABLE > > Builds a gzipped tar file ... > > Dave > > Dave Cramer > > dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca > http://www.credativ.ca
Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> writes: > Tom, > I've fixed the tar file. Um ... you just replaced the tar file with another one of the same name? That's going to cause a lot of confusion. [ downloads and takes a look... ] What's worse, the contents of the tarballs aren't the same --- it looks like this is a slightly newer snapshot than what was in the old tarball. Which means it doesn't correspond to the sources that were used to build the published jar files. I think you've just converted a minor annoyance into a major disaster. When I package a Red Hat or Fedora package, there are automated cross-checks that verify that the tarball I provide matches bit-for-bit what can be downloaded from the upstream URL I claim to have got it from. I imagine other distros have similar checks. You just broke that --- as of now, the package I finished making a few hours ago will fail verification. I think you should either go back to the previous tarball for now, or repackage this as a "1002" build. It's too late to be changing the published tarball for build 1001. regards, tom lane
Tom,
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
I've repackaged as 1002.
Dave
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Um ... you just replaced the tar file with another one of the same name?
That's going to cause a lot of confusion.
[ downloads and takes a look... ] What's worse, the contents of the
tarballs aren't the same --- it looks like this is a slightly newer
snapshot than what was in the old tarball. Which means it doesn't
correspond to the sources that were used to build the published jar
files.
I think you've just converted a minor annoyance into a major disaster.
When I package a Red Hat or Fedora package, there are automated
cross-checks that verify that the tarball I provide matches bit-for-bit
what can be downloaded from the upstream URL I claim to have got it
from. I imagine other distros have similar checks. You just broke
that --- as of now, the package I finished making a few hours ago
will fail verification.
I think you should either go back to the previous tarball for now,
or repackage this as a "1002" build. It's too late to be changing
the published tarball for build 1001.
regards, tom lane
I have reviewed this suggestion and have encountered problems that would complicate the execution of the script as it exists from the current directory with Git-Archive. Presently the current directory to run the script is the same as the ant build, source directory. The script does not care if the that directory is a Git repository or not. I can overcome this, but I would have to understand your usage. Do you wish to use the script within the repository or one directory above or other? Also the current src build by that method, 9.2-1002, has added an additional file, pax_global_header, at the top that looks like is only a git file that has something to do with the state of the repository. danap. > dmp wrote: > Ok I will review and update the script tomorrow. > > danap. > > Dave Cramer wrote: >> Dana, >> >> This command >> >> git archive --prefix=postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src/ --format=tar.gz -o >> postgresql-jdbc-9.2-1001.src.tar.gz REL9_2_STABLE >> >> Builds a gzipped tar file ... >> >> Dave >> >> Dave Cramer >> >> dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca >> http://www.credativ.ca
Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> writes: > Tom, > I've repackaged as 1002. Thanks, appreciate it. regards, tom lane