-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Remy,
Excelent work! I, for one, appreciate your effort. Now that you have re-inspired me, I have a basic comps.xml question that I _think_ has already been answered here (pardon my dense-ness): In theory if you want to create a very stripped down subset of FC you could:
1. Generate a list of package %name that yield no external dependncies 2. Create "comps.xml" that only lists %name from (1) in a group called "base" 3. Do the pungi pungi ;P
Is this correct?
Earl
On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:36:12 -0500 Remy Bohmer mythtv.bohmer@gmail.com wrote:
Hello All,
I got it! but, it is very strange... ;-))
I debugged the pkgorder script and found the following:
- At the routine 'processTransaction()' the complete lists of
dependencies is available, then it calls the routine printMatchingPkgs() to print the packages to standard, after it has checked that they are available.
- The filemask that is passed to printMatchingPkgs() through
'fpattern', is build up as follows: <os-dir>/Product/package*. Where Product starts with a capital, but my product_name in the pungi configuration does NOT star with a capital. So, the product-dir in the os-dir does not start with a capital. So, no dependency files can be found, leaving a os-disc1 with just a few files in it...
I searched through the entire tree several times, but nowhere I have listed the productname with a capital, so this capital must be introduced by the tooling itself ! (Fedora also starts with a capital... Redhat also, and probably other distros using anaconda also?)
So, to be able to build a customised CD, you must use a product_name in Pungi that starts with a capital. I have changed this in my build environment and now it works!
I believe the problem is introduced by collecting the dependencies in the routine addGroups() -> ds.ResolveDeps() in the pkgorder script.
For me it is going to deep in the external tooling, which I do not fully understand yet how they work. Maybe someone else recognises this phenomenon and can pick it up from here? Or if someone can give me some tips on this, I can look further into it...
Kind Regards,
Remy Bohmer
2007/2/2, Remy Bohmer mythtv.bohmer@gmail.com:
Hello All,
I renamed all my groups to 'core', 'base', 'base-x' and 'development-tools', and it does not make any difference... So,
I
believe it is not only related to the group naming in the comps file... I am going to debug this some more today.
If anyone has a good idea about this, please let me know.
Kind Regards,
Remy
2007/2/1, Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com:
On Thursday 01 February 2007 05:40, Remy Bohmer wrote:
Attached are the results of this command: /usr/lib/anaconda-runtime/pkgorder /home/me/cdbuildtree/results/myrelease/i386/os i386
myproduct
I replaced 'myproduct' with 'Fedora'. No differences. The produced list is exactly like the list of RPM's in my os-
disc1-
directory. Thus, much too short...
Does this give you some new ideas?
It would appear that pkgorder doesn't know about the other
groups you have in
your comps file perhaps. pkgorder is just a python script,
I'd poke at it
and see how it figures out the order, and see if perhaps you
need to change
your group names in comps.
-- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
-- Fedora-buildsys-list mailing list Fedora-buildsys-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-buildsys-list
On Friday 02 February 2007 14:49, Earl wrote:
- Generate a list of package %name that yield no external
dependncies 2. Create "comps.xml" that only lists %name from (1) in a group called "base" 3. Do the pungi pungi ;P
Is this correct?
Pretty much. I don't yet have an "official" list of absolutely requires packages, so you still need some things you might not expect, but see the minimal files in /etc/pungi
buildsys@lists.fedoraproject.org