Making a package obsolete

Making a package obsolete

[Ken Brown]

I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents will 
be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle this by 
defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard way to 
deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary 
tarballs and .hint file manually?

Ken

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Jon Turney]

On 12/05/2017 22:02, Ken Brown wrote:
> I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents will
> be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle this by
> defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard way to
> deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary
> tarballs and .hint file manually?

I think the best way to do that is to bump your package revision, change 
it's category to _obsolete, make it's contents empty, and make it depend 
on the packages which are replacing it.

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Ken Brown]

On 5/13/2017 7:12 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 12/05/2017 22:02, Ken Brown wrote:
>> I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents will
>> be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle this by
>> defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard way to
>> deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary
>> tarballs and .hint file manually?
>
> I think the best way to do that is to bump your package revision, change
> it's category to _obsolete, make it's contents empty, and make it depend
> on the packages which are replacing it.

Yes, that was my first thought.  But there's no longer a source file for 
the obsolete package[1], and cygport complains that SRC_URI must be 
defined.  Maybe cygport should be patched to allow an empty SRC_URI when 
the category is _obsolete.  Or do you see another way around this?

Ken

The package in question is texlive-collection-htmlxml, which no longer 
exists upstream.

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Jon Turney]

On 13/05/2017 20:44, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 5/13/2017 7:12 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
>> On 12/05/2017 22:02, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents will
>>> be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle this by
>>> defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard way to
>>> deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary
>>> tarballs and .hint file manually?
>>
>> I think the best way to do that is to bump your package revision, change
>> it's category to _obsolete, make it's contents empty, and make it depend
>> on the packages which are replacing it.
>
> Yes, that was my first thought.  But there's no longer a source file for
> the obsolete package[1], and cygport complains that SRC_URI must be
> defined.  Maybe cygport should be patched to allow an empty SRC_URI when
> the category is _obsolete.  Or do you see another way around this?

I would think you can use the same SRC_URI as previously, but set 
PKG_CONTENTS="" and PKG_IGNORE="*" ?

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Ken Brown]

On 5/14/2017 1:38 PM, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 13/05/2017 20:44, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 5/13/2017 7:12 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
>>> On 12/05/2017 22:02, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>> I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents
>>>> will
>>>> be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle this by
>>>> defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard
>>>> way to
>>>> deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary
>>>> tarballs and .hint file manually?
>>>
>>> I think the best way to do that is to bump your package revision, change
>>> it's category to _obsolete, make it's contents empty, and make it depend
>>> on the packages which are replacing it.
>>
>> Yes, that was my first thought.  But there's no longer a source file for
>> the obsolete package[1], and cygport complains that SRC_URI must be
>> defined.  Maybe cygport should be patched to allow an empty SRC_URI when
>> the category is _obsolete.  Or do you see another way around this?
>
> I would think you can use the same SRC_URI as previously, but set
> PKG_CONTENTS="" and PKG_IGNORE="*" ?

You're right, I can do something like that.  I was being overly pedantic 
in wanting SRC_URI to be "accurate".  Sorry for the noise.

Ken

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Brian Inglis]

On 2017-05-15 09:56, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 15/05/2017 15:30, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 5/14/2017 1:38 PM, Jon Turney wrote:
>>> On 13/05/2017 20:44, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2017 7:12 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
>>>>> On 12/05/2017 22:02, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>>>> I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle
>>>>>> this by
>>>>>> defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard
>>>>>> way to
>>>>>> deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary
>>>>>> tarballs and .hint file manually?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the best way to do that is to bump your package revision,
>>>>> change
>>>>> it's category to _obsolete, make it's contents empty, and make it
>>>>> depend
>>>>> on the packages which are replacing it.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that was my first thought.  But there's no longer a source file
>>>> for
>>>> the obsolete package[1], and cygport complains that SRC_URI must be
>>>> defined.  Maybe cygport should be patched to allow an empty SRC_URI
>>>> when
>>>> the category is _obsolete.  Or do you see another way around this?
>>>
>>> I would think you can use the same SRC_URI as previously, but set
>>> PKG_CONTENTS="" and PKG_IGNORE="*" ?
>>
>> You're right, I can do something like that.  I was being overly pedantic
>> in wanting SRC_URI to be "accurate".  Sorry for the noise.
> 
> You can always make an empty tarball called
> texlive-collection-htmlxml-20170515.tar.xz or whatever, and use that for
> SRC_URI.

[intended for cygwin-apps?]

-- 
Take care. Thanks, Brian Inglis, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Ken Brown]

[resending to cygwin-apps]

On 5/15/2017 11:56 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 15/05/2017 15:30, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 5/14/2017 1:38 PM, Jon Turney wrote:
>>> On 13/05/2017 20:44, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2017 7:12 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
>>>>> On 12/05/2017 22:02, Ken Brown wrote:
>>>>>> I have a package that is going to become obsolete, but its contents
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> be distributed among several other packages.  So I can't handle
>>>>>> this by
>>>>>> defining OBSOLETES in any one .cygport file.  Is there a standard
>>>>>> way to
>>>>>> deal with this using cygport, or should I just create the necessary
>>>>>> tarballs and .hint file manually?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the best way to do that is to bump your package revision,
>>>>> change
>>>>> it's category to _obsolete, make it's contents empty, and make it
>>>>> depend
>>>>> on the packages which are replacing it.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that was my first thought.  But there's no longer a source file
>>>> for
>>>> the obsolete package[1], and cygport complains that SRC_URI must be
>>>> defined.  Maybe cygport should be patched to allow an empty SRC_URI
>>>> when
>>>> the category is _obsolete.  Or do you see another way around this?
>>>
>>> I would think you can use the same SRC_URI as previously, but set
>>> PKG_CONTENTS="" and PKG_IGNORE="*" ?
>>
>> You're right, I can do something like that.  I was being overly pedantic
>> in wanting SRC_URI to be "accurate".  Sorry for the noise.
>
> You can always make an empty tarball called
> texlive-collection-htmlxml-20170515.tar.xz or whatever, and use that for
> SRC_URI.

Good idea, thanks.  But it turns out that there's another problem: 
cygport won't actually create an empty binary tarball in this situation.

The relevant code is in pkg_pkg.cygpart around lines 149--163, 
especially this part:

		elif (( pkg_count == 1 ))
		then
			pkg_contents="*"
		else
			pkg_contents=

We get here if PKG_CONTENTS is unset or empty.  (There's actually no 
test to see if it's set but empty.)  In the situation under discussion, 
this results in pkg_contents="*" followed by a tar error.

Yaakov, shouldn't the user be allowed to explicitly set PKG_CONTENTS 
empty and have cygport honor that, at least for obsolete packages?

Ken

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Jon Turney]

On 15/05/2017 17:12, Brian Inglis wrote:
> [intended for cygwin-apps?]

Doh! Yes.

Re: Making a package obsolete

[szgyg]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1003 bytes --]

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:20:46PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 5/15/2017 11:56 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
>> You can always make an empty tarball called
>> texlive-collection-htmlxml-20170515.tar.xz or whatever, and use that for
>> SRC_URI.
> 
> Good idea, thanks.  But it turns out that there's another problem: cygport
> won't actually create an empty binary tarball in this situation.
> 
> The relevant code is in pkg_pkg.cygpart around lines 149--163, especially
> this part:
> 
> 		elif (( pkg_count == 1 ))
> 		then
> 			pkg_contents="*"
> 		else
> 			pkg_contents=
> 
> We get here if PKG_CONTENTS is unset or empty.  (There's actually no test to
> see if it's set but empty.)  In the situation under discussion, this results
> in pkg_contents="*" followed by a tar error.
> 
> Yaakov, shouldn't the user be allowed to explicitly set PKG_CONTENTS empty
> and have cygport honor that, at least for obsolete packages?

I've used the attached files to create an empty, dependencies-only package.

szgyg

[-- Attachment #2: dependencies.cygport --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 255 bytes --]


NAME="dependencies"
VERSION="0"
RELEASE="0"

SUMMARY="dependencies (Metapackage)"
CATEGORY="Devel"

REQUIRES="" # put stuff here

####################

SRC_URI="empty.tar.gz"
SRC_DIR="empty"

KEEPDIRS="/usr"

src_compile() { : ; }
src_install() { : ; }


[-- Attachment #3: empty.tar.gz --]
[-- Type: application/x-tar-gz, Size: 123 bytes --]

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Ken Brown]

On 5/15/2017 12:51 PM, szgyg wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 12:20:46PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
>> On 5/15/2017 11:56 AM, Jon Turney wrote:
>>> You can always make an empty tarball called
>>> texlive-collection-htmlxml-20170515.tar.xz or whatever, and use that for
>>> SRC_URI.
>>
>> Good idea, thanks.  But it turns out that there's another problem: cygport
>> won't actually create an empty binary tarball in this situation.
>>
>> The relevant code is in pkg_pkg.cygpart around lines 149--163, especially
>> this part:
>>
>> 		elif (( pkg_count == 1 ))
>> 		then
>> 			pkg_contents="*"
>> 		else
>> 			pkg_contents=
>>
>> We get here if PKG_CONTENTS is unset or empty.  (There's actually no test to
>> see if it's set but empty.)  In the situation under discussion, this results
>> in pkg_contents="*" followed by a tar error.
>>
>> Yaakov, shouldn't the user be allowed to explicitly set PKG_CONTENTS empty
>> and have cygport honor that, at least for obsolete packages?
>
> I've used the attached files to create an empty, dependencies-only package.

Yes, that works around the problem by not actually creating an empty 
binary tarball.  But I still think cygport should allow the creation of 
an empty binary tarball by a set but empty PKG_CONTENTS.

Ken

Re: Making a package obsolete

[szgyg]

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 01:22:04PM -0400, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 5/15/2017 12:51 PM, szgyg wrote:
>> I've used the attached files to create an empty, dependencies-only package.
> 
> Yes, that works around the problem by not actually creating an empty binary
> tarball.  But I still think cygport should allow the creation of an empty
> binary tarball by a set but empty PKG_CONTENTS.

Yeah, it creates a tarball with an empty usr/ directory. What I would
really like is a cygclass for empty packages.

szgyg

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Achim Gratz]

Ken Brown writes:
> Yes, that works around the problem by not actually creating an empty
> binary tarball.  But I still think cygport should allow the creation
> of an empty binary tarball by a set but empty PKG_CONTENTS.

What we should really do is make setup handle obsoletions instead of
this empty-install-package dance.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptations for Waldorf Q V3.00R3 and Q+ V3.54R2:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada

Re: Making a package obsolete

[Ken Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 684 bytes --]

On 5/15/2017 12:20 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> The relevant code is in pkg_pkg.cygpart around lines 149--163,
> especially this part:
>
>         elif (( pkg_count == 1 ))
>         then
>             pkg_contents="*"
>         else
>             pkg_contents=
>
> We get here if PKG_CONTENTS is unset or empty.  (There's actually no
> test to see if it's set but empty.)  In the situation under discussion,
> this results in pkg_contents="*" followed by a tar error.
>
> Yaakov, shouldn't the user be allowed to explicitly set PKG_CONTENTS
> empty and have cygport honor that, at least for obsolete packages?

The attached patch implements this, and not just for obsolete packages.

Ken


[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Honor-the-PKG_CONTENTS-variable-if-it-is-set-even-if.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 857 bytes --]

From e6c3f77e9b9c2e0767c0c098111531157e639309 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ken Brown <kbrown@cornell.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 13:46:30 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] Honor the PKG_CONTENTS variable if it is set, even if it is
 empty

---
 lib/pkg_pkg.cygpart | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/pkg_pkg.cygpart b/lib/pkg_pkg.cygpart
index c59b9aa2..5008eadd 100644
--- a/lib/pkg_pkg.cygpart
+++ b/lib/pkg_pkg.cygpart
@@ -146,10 +146,10 @@ __pkg_binpkg() {
 			*)      distsubdir=${pkg_name[${n}]} ;;
 		esac
 
-		if defined ${pkg_contents_var}
+		if [ "${!pkg_contents_var+set}" = "set" ]
 		then
 			pkg_contents=${!pkg_contents_var}
-		elif defined PKG_CONTENTS[${n}]
+		elif [ "${PKG_CONTENTS[${n}]+set}" = "set" ]
 		then
 			pkg_contents=${PKG_CONTENTS[${n}]}
 		elif [ -f ${C}/${pkg_list[${n}]}.list ]
-- 
2.12.3