[Dev] Migrating Parabola infrastructure from the old server to newtron

[Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli]

On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 20:13:21 -0600
Luke Shumaker <lukeshu at lukeshu.com> wrote:
> > - Why do we need a configuration management tool to generate the
> >   packages? Would migrating the packages generated by holo to more
> >   standard PKGBUILDS inside abslibre in a separate config
> > repository be a good idea? So far I found several advantages in
> > doing that:
> 
> We aren't using `holo-build`; just the core of Holo--they *are*
> standard PKGBUILDs.  Well, they `source common.sh` which is a few
> shell functions that I found useful for writing config-oriented
> PKGBUILDs.

By non-standard I wanted to convey the fact that:
- I've managed to build them with makepkg but they don't work (yet)
  with libremakepkg. So they are different from the PKGBUILDs we have
  in abslibre from that reguard. They also require some work to
  integrate in the structure used by abslibre.
- In addition they are not made in the same way PKGBUILDs are typically
  made so while makepkg accepts them, they look less familiar to
  developers.

The fact that they share code is really interesting. Unfortunately I've
not managed to integrate that well with libremakepkg, so I will
probably not be able to use something like that for the u-boot packages
yet.

> So what Holo does for us is provide a pacman post-install hook that
> gives us a way to patch files owned by other packages.
I understand the point now. Thanks a lot.

This means that if we add them in abslibre they would conflict with the
configuration from existing packages.

And if we have part in abslibre and part in holo config repository, we
end up having too much parallel systems.

Denis.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20220402/5c261967/attachment.sig>