这是indexloc提供的服务,不要输入任何密码
Skip to content

Conversation

@alexbodn
Copy link

the patches to packages/gnucobol solve the problem in issue #20818 entirely, while also upgrading upstream gnucobol.

however, i'm about to ask upstream to adopt one hefty patch file, so that the package will be termux related only.

does my PR include commits out of packages/gnucobol they may be safely discarded as unrelated.

@alexbodn
Copy link
Author

i know the patch seems a mess, since the commits are my progress with building and checking the package.
here is one file patch that diffs end - start without any back and forth, or other directories.
gnucobol.patch

@GitMensch
Copy link

These are too many commits. Can you please squash them into two (one for the update, the other for bdb compatibility and use)?

TERMUX_PKG_VERSION=3.1.2
TERMUX_PKG_REVISION=3
TERMUX_PKG_VERSION=3.2
TERMUX_PKG_REVISION=4

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If you increase the version then revision is to be set to 0 or 1 (please check the docs)

TERMUX_PKG_SHA256=597005d71fd7d65b90cbe42bbfecd5a9ec0445388639404662e70d53ddf22574
TERMUX_PKG_DEPENDS="json-c, libgmp, libvbisam, libxml2, ncurses"
TERMUX_PKG_SHA256=3bb48af46ced4779facf41fdc2ee60e4ccb86eaa99d010b36685315df39c2ee2
##TERMUX_PKG_SRCURL=git+https://github.com/alexbodn/gnucobol-3.2.git

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please drop the commented parts

Copy link

@GitMensch GitMensch left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Packages libdb should be part of a separate PR, no?

@alexbodn
Copy link
Author

alexbodn commented Jul 27, 2024

Packages libdb should be part of a separate PR, no?

sure, i didn't know how to proceed, so i have initialy pushed all my commits during this period.
to correct this, i have attached to my other comment the diff of packages/gnucobol only from my first checkout to my last commit.
btw, @GitMensch , my upstream.patch doesn't have much to do with termux, has some missed includes and could help with any cross compilation, so i'd encourage you to apply to your distro. configure is autogenerated, but it's needed for now already.

@alexbodn
Copy link
Author

These are too many commits. Can you please squash them into two (one for the update, the other for bdb compatibility and use)?

sure, the workflow is triggered by commits, so all my trials had to be commited.
i've also sent a one patch from start to end.

here it is

gnucobol.patch

@TomJo2000
Copy link
Member

sure, the workflow is triggered by commits, so all my trials had to be commited. i've also sent a one patch from start to end.

The workflows are also dispatched when force pushing to a PR branch.
I recommend you familiarize yourself with the git commit --amend, git rebase -i and git push --force-with-lease= commands.

Copy link
Member

@TomJo2000 TomJo2000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Completely unmergable in its current state.
Barely reviewable as is too.

else
echo "INVALID"
pkg_lint_error=true
## pkg_lint_error=true
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You may not disable the License check just because your package does not pass it.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this was for another package. this one does pass.
could you take a lokk a my gnucobol.patch file attached to a comment above?
it doesn't contain other directories, nor back and forth trials.

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
TERMUX_PKG_HOMEPAGE=https://www.oracle.com/database/berkeley-db
TERMUX_PKG_DESCRIPTION="The Berkeley DB embedded database system (library) last non AGPL"
TERMUX_PKG_LICENSE=Sleepycat
Copy link
Member

@TomJo2000 TomJo2000 Jul 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should be set to custom.
If you want to denote a license name, do so in a comment above.
See:

# License: MIT-feh
TERMUX_PKG_LICENSE="custom"
TERMUX_PKG_LICENSE_FILE="COPYING"

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sleepycat was on the list of licenses on termux-packages, but indeed lint didn't pass.

TERMUX_PKG_CONFLICTS="libdb-dev,libdb"
TERMUX_PKG_REPLACES="libdb-dev,libdb"
TERMUX_PKG_PROVIDES="libdb"
TERMUX_PKG_BLACKLISTED_ARCHES="arm, i686, x86_64"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would you mind explaining why you disabled all but aarch64 for this package?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sure.
first, it's another package i tried to build.
it's build took a lot of time, and i could only try on aarch64.

TERMUX_PKG_LICENSE_FILE="../LICENSE"
TERMUX_PKG_MAINTAINER="@termux"
TERMUX_PKG_VERSION=6.0.19
TERMUX_PKG_REVISION=1
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TERMUX_PKG_REVISION shouldn't be set for a newly introduced package.

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
TERMUX_PKG_HOMEPAGE=https://www.oracle.com/database/berkeley-db
TERMUX_PKG_DESCRIPTION="The Berkeley DB embedded database system (library) last non AGPL"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We already provide a libdb package.
What exactly necessitates packaging libdb6 specifically?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

libdb6 is not the issue in this PR.

  1. libdb 6.0.19 was the last libdb that is not AGPL.
  2. v6 had more features dropped in very 18.1.40, like sql and client-server interfaces.
  3. debian also prefer v5, even older.

Copy link
Member

@TomJo2000 TomJo2000 Jul 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What the actual hell is this patch.
How do you expect anyone to review, let alone maintain this?

It's gonna stop applying immediately after the next version upgrade.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i'd rather look at gnucobol.patch instead. do Ctrl-F here. it contains only changes to packages/gnucobol.

the PR itself mirrors all my commits to my termux-packages fork during my work on gnucobol. as the CI workflow would only work on commits, i had to commit all my trials until i got the problem fixed. a big thank goes to github for all these resources.

the problem my patch came to solve was with the upstream configure script that wouldn't work correctly when cross compiling.
most of my patch, the file packages/gnucobol/upstream.patch is directed to the upstream developers. i will delete it here once they apply it.
however it's here to make gnucobol run correctly already, based on their current official released archive.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll have a look at this patch (and guess most things area already solved in the current dev snapshot for GnuCOBOL 3.3, but the final release will take some months)

@alexbodn
Copy link
Author

alexbodn commented Jul 28, 2024

the problems in this PR challenged me to try a better way to wrap my changes.

thank you everybody.

i'm closing this PR and have submitted another at.

@GitMensch part of the code to this patch belongs, in my opinion, upstream, to gnucobol project for any other cross compilation.
you may see my work at, in branch termux.
if that suites you please checkout and provide an updated release to the termux port.
otherwise, i could push upstream.patch without configure to termux, and just run autoconfigure at build time.
your choice.

@alexbodn alexbodn closed this Jul 28, 2024
@GitMensch
Copy link

Can you please create another PR for BDB?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants