On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 14:53 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> Thanks. We've learned with time to organized ourselves really well around bug reports (both discussions and guides for implementation), so: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10256

OK, whatever helps progress this. I'll sign up to the issue and contribute just as soon as I have (space_x, space_y, space_z, time) to focus on this to create something useful – we like 4-vectors ;-)

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On 6/3/2013 8:59 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
> Is there a tarball or only this infamous zipfile?

I can't believe it is hard to create a tarball from a zipfile.

On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 12:38 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 6/3/2013 8:59 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
> > Is there a tarball or only this infamous zipfile?
> 
> I can't believe it is hard to create a tarball from a zipfile.

Actually it can be since tarballs can represent symbolic links whereas it appears zipfiles cannot. However, I think the issue here re deb files is deeper. The solution to the issue as far as generating a deb is concerned is to tag the DMD Git repository so that anyone can generate an official source tarball given the release tag.

I appreciate there are licencing issues that means we cannot expect to get DMD into Debian itself, if we can have a Debian toolchain build that targets Debian non-free, we can get DMD into Ubuntu and Mint as well as accesible for Debian users. I believe this to be a good aim.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On Monday, 3 June 2013 at 19:50:29 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> The solution to the issue as far as generating a deb is
> concerned is to tag the DMD Git repository so that anyone can generate
> an official source tarball given the release tag.

It is how this is done in Arch Linux right now. Uses "v2.063.1" tag.
Well, not done yet, because there is still 2.062 in main repo, but is incoming.

On 06/03/2013 08:25 PM, Russel Winder wrote:
> Also there should be a symbolic link libphobos2.so.0 shouldn't there?

At some point yes, the minor version should be dropped from the so/symlink used by the application and is set as the soname.
But i would wait for phobos/dmd to stabilize, so there whould be no need to increase the so version every release.

-- 
Mike Wey

On Mon, 03 Jun 2013 09:23:35 +0200
Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> wrote:

> On 2013-06-03 00:25, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> 
> > Yea, I'm working on a replacement.
> 
> Please keep the existing zip packages as well, we don't want to break DVM :)
> 

I intend to. But I do think it would be good if we then update DVM to use the platform-specific versions, to preserve bandwidth and improve dload/installation speeds.

Possibly related to that, I keep meaning to look into updating DVM to install *both* -m32 and -m64 abilities on appropriate platforms (unless you've already beaten me to it?)

On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:33:05 -0700
Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg@gmx.com> wrote:

> On Monday, June 03, 2013 00:38:09 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 16:58:29 -0700
> > 
> > Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg@gmx.com> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, June 02, 2013 16:52:03 Walter Bright wrote:
> > > > On 6/2/2013 2:52 PM, Russel Winder wrote:
> > > > > Not being able to put symlinks in a zipfile has nothing to do with getting deb files and RPM files correct since they should be built from tarballs.
> > > > 
> > > > Anyone is welcome to help out with the scripts that create deb and
> > > > 
> > > > rpm files, which are here:
> > > >    https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/installer
> > > 
> > > Well, Nick is looking into some of that stuff. Hopefully, he'll be able to sort it out.
> > 
> > What I'm doing is zip-packaging and bootstrapping. I don't really know much of anything about debs, rpms and such. Apologies if I've mislead anyone.
> 
> Well, it's all part of the same thing. Maybe you won't deal with the rpms or debs explicitly, but what you're doing should enable them to be fixed. It's splitting up the zip file and making it so that we're distributing proper symlinks with *nix which is the key thing.
> 

Ok. It will, naturally, be generating a non-zipped DMD release directory (just so it *can* then be zipped up), so maybe that could help the other packagers.

On Mon, 03 Jun 2013 19:30:16 +0100
Russel Winder <russel@winder.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> The start point has to be a tarball of the source. If this is not part of the distribution release then we need to agree an officially acceptable process for creating a release source tarball.
> 

My tool will do this.

On 6/3/2013 12:50 PM, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 12:38 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 6/3/2013 8:59 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
>>> Is there a tarball or only this infamous zipfile?
>>
>> I can't believe it is hard to create a tarball from a zipfile.
>
> Actually it can be since tarballs can represent symbolic links whereas
> it appears zipfiles cannot.

1. unzip the zip file
2. add symbolic links
3. create tarball


> However, I think the issue here re deb files
> is deeper. The solution to the issue as far as generating a deb is
> concerned is to tag the DMD Git repository so that anyone can generate
> an official source tarball given the release tag.

It's already tagged with v2.063


> I appreciate there are licencing issues that means we cannot expect to
> get DMD into Debian itself, if we can have a Debian toolchain build that
> targets Debian non-free, we can get DMD into Ubuntu and Mint as well as
> accesible for Debian users. I believe this to be a good aim.

Sounds good to me.

On Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:33:03 -0400
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:
> 
> I quoted all of the above because I so much agree with it. Packaging all OSs in a zip is really disingenuous and now it's come to a head. Let's fix this for 2.064.
> 

FWIW, I fully intend to have my corner of this ready by then.