This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Building from source packages
- From: Marco Atzeri <marco dot atzeri at gmail dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 18:32:35 +0200
- Subject: Re: Building from source packages
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <e04b604a-3e2a-80b2-5653-b1eeac1ae395 at dronecode dot org dot uk>
On 13/05/2016 16:33, Jon Turney wrote:
Recently I've done a little prototyping of a system to build from
uploaded source packages in a VM, to verify that they recreate packages
with the same contents as the uploaded packages.
Issues I noted were:
* a handful of packages are oddities
These often contain source and patches, but no build script, so the
configuration used by the maintainer to build the package isn't recorded
(at least in a way accessible to automation)
pkg ver arch
--- --- ----
bzr 2.6+b2-2 x86 contains source for 2.6b2-1 and 2.6+b2-2
exim 4.86-1 both
fetchmail 6.3.21-1 x86
flex 2.5.39-1 both orphaned
ipc-utils 1.0-1 x86
mined 2015.25-0 x86_64 a note from maintainer pointing to x86 src
nmh 1.6-2 both uniquely, g-b-s script name doesn't end .sh
popt 1.16-1 both orphaned
suite3270 3.3.15ga9-1 both uniquely, multiple g-b-s and one tarfile
flex and popt were probably built with a g-b-s like script by CGF.
I had the same issue when I adopted make.
popt version is last upstream, while
flex had a new release last November after long time