You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4cxx-dev@logging.apache.org by Pau Garcia i Quiles <pg...@elpauer.org> on 2007/08/11 16:13:24 UTC
Packaging log4cxx
Hello,
I am trying to package log4cxx 0.9.8 (subversion checkouts, actually)
for Debian and Ubuntu. I succeeded with a 20070712 checkout and with a
20070810 checkout.
Unfortunately, there are some nasty issues preventing the packages to spread:
* What is the build system? ant? autotools? I thought it was autotools
until 0.9.7, ant from then on, but three was commit on July 30th
fixing the autotools build system, therefore I have doubts now (my
packages are using ant for now)
* Downloading apr, cppunit, etc in the build process is unacceptable
for Debian and Ubuntu. The build farm has no Internet access for a
very good reason: make sure we will be able to build the package
anywhere, anytime; no missing files. Is there any good reason to
download apr, cppunit, etc instead of using the already installed
versions?
Thank you.
PS: In case you want to build the packages yourself, you can download
the .orig.tar.gz and the .diff.gz from
http://ppa.dogfood.launchpad.net/pgquiles/ubuntu/pool/universe/l/log4cxx/
--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
Re: Packaging log4cxx
Posted by Pau Garcia i Quiles <pg...@elpauer.org>.
Quoting Andreas Fester <af...@apache.org>:
> BTW: The nightly build currently has an issue with the documentation
> generation, since I seem to use an autotools feature which is not
> available with the autotools version on my server ; but this should
> not affect the Debian source package ...
Yes, I have experienced the same problem in my system when I have
tried to build your packages:
"Error: tag INPUT: input source `/src/main/include' does not exist"
My packages are using Ant and this morning I succeeded in making them
buildable using only installed packages, no without downloads. I had
to modify the root build.xml in several places, though. Documentation
generation works in my packages, by the way.
Why is log4cxx maintaining two build systems (ant and autotools)? (of
course my advice would be to move to CMake)
--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
Re: Packaging log4cxx
Posted by Andreas Fester <af...@apache.org>.
Hi,
[...]
>>> PS: In case you want to build the packages yourself, you can
>>> download the .orig.tar.gz and the .diff.gz from
>>> http://ppa.dogfood.launchpad.net/pgquiles/ubuntu/pool/universe/l/log4cxx/
>>>
>>
>> Andreas Fester maintains a log4cxx package for Debian at
>> http://littletux.homelinux.org/projects.php?fileid=apache. He should
>> be watching this list and will probably have more to add.
as part of my nightly build, I am also creating snapshot debian source
packages at
http://littletux.homelinux.org/log4cxx/
It should be possible to create binary packages for Debian sid like
$ dget http://littletux.homelinux.org/log4cxx/log4cxx_0.10.0~cvs20070815-1.dsc
$ sudo pbuilder build log4cxx_0.10.0~cvs20070815-1.dsc
Not that the date part of the file changes every day, of course ;)
Best Regards,
Andreas
BTW: The nightly build currently has an issue with the documentation
generation, since I seem to use an autotools feature which is not
available with the autotools version on my server ; but this should
not affect the Debian source package ...
Re: Packaging log4cxx
Posted by Pau Garcia i Quiles <pg...@elpauer.org>.
Quoting Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>:
>
> On Aug 11, 2007, at 9:13 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am trying to package log4cxx 0.9.8 (subversion checkouts,
>> actually) for Debian and Ubuntu. I succeeded with a 20070712
>> checkout and with a 20070810 checkout.
>>
>
> The version number 0.9.8 implies binary compatibility with 0.9.7 which
> will not be the case. The anticipated next release is 0.10.0.
I do not agree. Binary compatibility is stated by soversions, not by
source versions. The only "compatibility" a 0.9.8 number would "imply"
is "the API in 0.9.8 is more or less the same as in 0.9.7, there are
no big changes".
>> Unfortunately, there are some nasty issues preventing the packages
>> to spread:
>>
>> * What is the build system? ant? autotools? I thought it was
>> autotools until 0.9.7, ant from then on, but three was commit on
>> July 30th fixing the autotools build system, therefore I have
>> doubts now (my packages are using ant for now)
>
> Maven (delegating to Ant) will be used to prepare the documentation,
> web site and source distributions including IDE project files (Visual
> Studio, XCode, maybe Sun Studio) for those so inclined. When the
> directory structure was rearranged to make it consistent with the Maven
> Standard Directory layout, the autotools build was temporarily broken
> until the corresponding changes could be made by Andreas Fester who
> maintains it.
Do you mean log4cxx will be buildable using both chains, autotools and
Maven-Ant?
>> * Downloading apr, cppunit, etc in the build process is
>> unacceptable for Debian and Ubuntu. The build farm has no Internet
>> access for a very good reason: make sure we will be able to build
>> the package anywhere, anytime; no missing files. Is there any good
>> reason to download apr, cppunit, etc instead of using the already
>> installed versions?
>
> The concept of installed versions doesn't carry over to Windows and way
> back in the day, prepackaged apr-1's were a rarity. The download of
> apr was problematic and currently there is a snapshot of apr-1.2.9 and
> apr-util-1.2.8 in the SVN tree. However, can't do the same for cppunit
> as it is not Apache licensed. Both builds can ignore the SVN snapshot
> and use the installed versions.
I did not know I could ignore the SVN snapshot and use the installed
version, thanks.
> If you have any ideas on how the
> dependencies could be managed better that would work across platforms,
> let me know. I was thinking that Maven (which handles Java
> dependencies) might be able to be exploited to deliver the source
> tarballs (or jars), but I don't think it has been used that way yet.
I have my own idea on that, but I guess you won't like it :-)
I would just have something like this in the INSTALL: "To build
log4cxx, you need apr (>= 1.2.9), apr-util (>= 1.2.8) and libcppunit
(>= 1.12)". Then some parameters like
"--with-apr=/usr/local/apache/apr
--with-apr-util=/usr/local/apache/apr-util" etc to force the
buildsystem to use a special version or find the installed version in
a non-default location.
I don't think log4cxx should fix the installation of software required
to build log4cxx. The user must be intelligent enough.
>> Thank you.
>>
>> PS: In case you want to build the packages yourself, you can
>> download the .orig.tar.gz and the .diff.gz from
>> http://ppa.dogfood.launchpad.net/pgquiles/ubuntu/pool/universe/l/log4cxx/
>
> Andreas Fester maintains a log4cxx package for Debian at
> http://littletux.homelinux.org/projects.php?fileid=apache. He should
> be watching this list and will probably have more to add.
I did not not that either. I packaged log4cxx because we use it at
work and installing software from source makes our systems dirty.
If Andreas Fester is providing packages, I guess it makes no sense to
have my own packages (his packages build using autotools, mine use
ant, but that's not important).
--
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
Re: Packaging log4cxx
Posted by Curt Arnold <ca...@apache.org>.
On Aug 11, 2007, at 9:13 AM, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to package log4cxx 0.9.8 (subversion checkouts,
> actually) for Debian and Ubuntu. I succeeded with a 20070712
> checkout and with a 20070810 checkout.
>
The version number 0.9.8 implies binary compatibility with 0.9.7
which will not be the case. The anticipated next release is 0.10.0.
> Unfortunately, there are some nasty issues preventing the packages
> to spread:
>
> * What is the build system? ant? autotools? I thought it was
> autotools until 0.9.7, ant from then on, but three was commit on
> July 30th fixing the autotools build system, therefore I have
> doubts now (my packages are using ant for now)
Maven (delegating to Ant) will be used to prepare the documentation,
web site and source distributions including IDE project files (Visual
Studio, XCode, maybe Sun Studio) for those so inclined. When the
directory structure was rearranged to make it consistent with the
Maven Standard Directory layout, the autotools build was temporarily
broken until the corresponding changes could be made by Andreas
Fester who maintains it.
>
> * Downloading apr, cppunit, etc in the build process is
> unacceptable for Debian and Ubuntu. The build farm has no Internet
> access for a very good reason: make sure we will be able to build
> the package anywhere, anytime; no missing files. Is there any good
> reason to download apr, cppunit, etc instead of using the already
> installed versions?
The concept of installed versions doesn't carry over to Windows and
way back in the day, prepackaged apr-1's were a rarity. The download
of apr was problematic and currently there is a snapshot of apr-1.2.9
and apr-util-1.2.8 in the SVN tree. However, can't do the same for
cppunit as it is not Apache licensed. Both builds can ignore the SVN
snapshot and use the installed versions. If you have any ideas on
how the dependencies could be managed better that would work across
platforms, let me know. I was thinking that Maven (which handles
Java dependencies) might be able to be exploited to deliver the
source tarballs (or jars), but I don't think it has been used that
way yet.
>
> Thank you.
>
> PS: In case you want to build the packages yourself, you can
> download the .orig.tar.gz and the .diff.gz from http://
> ppa.dogfood.launchpad.net/pgquiles/ubuntu/pool/universe/l/log4cxx/
Andreas Fester maintains a log4cxx package for Debian at http://
littletux.homelinux.org/projects.php?fileid=apache. He should be
watching this list and will probably have more to add.