Re: [Mingw-cross-env-list] MXE packages as APT

[Nagaev Boris]

On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Volker Grabsch <address@hidden> wrote:
> Nagaev Boris schrieb:
>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Volker Grabsch <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >
>> > This seems to refer to the old package name.  (Since this is just a
>> > comment, I merged the pull request nevertheless.)
>>
>> Fixed in https://github.com/mxe/mxe/pull/742
>
> Already merged by Timothy. :-)
>
>> > Is it possible to perform a very simple check at the beginning
>> > of the script?
>>
>> It is checked:
>>
>> assert(trim(shell('pwd')) == MXE_DIR,
>>   "Clone MXE to " .. MXE_DIR)
>
> Oh, I missed that.  Great!
>
>> /var/cache/apt/archives/mxe-x86-64-w64-mingw32.static-gcc-mpfr_3.1.3_all.deb
>> (--unpack):
>>  trying to overwrite '/usr/lib/mxe/usr/share/info/mpfr.info', which is
>> also in package mxe-i686-w64-mingw32.static-gcc-mpfr 3.1.3
>> dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe)
>>
>> Possible workaround: add the following arguments to apt-get command:
>>  -o Dpkg::Options::="--force-overwrite"
>
> This is quite a hack.  We should strive for a proper solution.
>
>
> I see two problems here:
>
>
> 1) There are documentation and other shared files installed, which we
>    don't need.  As already mentioned, we even try to avoid building
>    those, but some receipes don't succeed in suppressing that.
>
>    I propose to blacklist certain sub directories such as
>    usr/share/info and usr/share/man.  Simply don't put them into
>    tar.xz in the first place.
>
>    If developers need docs and stuff, they should simply install the
>    native *-dev and *-doc packages.  (which I suppose they already did
>    anyway, because you usually develop and debug natively before
>    running the cross compiler.)
>
>
> 2) Maybe some packages may install shared files that are actually
>    needed for the build.  That shouldn't happen.  All build receipes
>    should be already "clean" in that regard.  But in case some package
>    I'm not entirely clear on that topic.
>
>
> For better analysis for those two issues, I recommend to
> systematically check all .tar.xz packages and to check which ones
> overlap.  (Or, do the reverse: For each file that is "reused", list
> all .tar.xz packages that contain it.)

Done.

List of files that are produced by more than one packages:
https://gist.github.com/starius/59625347cd68a21d9cc9#file-dups-txt

List of packages producing the files from first set:
https://gist.github.com/starius/59625347cd68a21d9cc9#file-dups2-txt


> With such data at hand, it would be a lot easier to discuss proper
> fixes, and to generate comprehensive blacklists.
>
>
> Regards,
> Volker
>
> --
> Volker Grabsch
> ---<<(())>>---



-- 


Best regards,
Boris Nagaev