Windows-Packaging

[Ralf Habacker]

Bernhard Reiter schrieb:
> Hello Ralf,
>
> On Montag, 12. Januar 2009, Ralf Habacker answered to Bernhard:
>   
>>> The KMail within Kontact Enterprise4 has reached beta status
>>> (minus packaging).
>>>       
>
>   
>> I guess that somewhere should be a meeting (may be in Osnabrück) where
>> all this package and build system related stuff could be discussed.
>> The results should be merged together into a good strategy for the next
>> years. 
>>     
>
> we would be happy to host such a meeting in Osnabrück.
> Berlin is another potential place.
>
> My experience with the discussion is, that it is difficult and we need to 
> inquire more. This prevents an effective meeting as of today, because it is 
> hard to decide in a low data situation.
>   
you mean a low experience situation ?
>> In the past we got several requests/ideas from which the 
>> following topics are extracted:
>>
>>     - package size improvements (better compression e.g. lzma)
>>     - single application packages
>>     - dependency improvements and base package splits to reduze required
>> installation size (there were reports that amarok needs about 500 MB
>> installation size yet)
>>     - single application standalone installer
>>     - required installer features and improvements
>>     - more topics ?
>>     
>
> One discussion on gpg4win-devel@ went into the subject, start
> the thread with  the last part of the following email 
> http://lists.wald.intevation.org/pipermail/gpg4win-devel/2008-October/000760.html
>   
I see - 

autobuilder - are you refering to 
http://www.debian.org/devel/buildd/index.de.html ?

hmmh, I had no time to go through the whole thread - but I stumpled over 
the following sentence

> It would also be good if kleopatra would get rid of the little issues like not following the expected packaging and
needing a bin directory.  

Why is it bad to have a bin directory - several windows packages uses those too for example msvc, platform sdk.
 
All source packages used for the kde on windows installation either kde or not uses a bin dir for executables and dll. 
Changing this will require additional support and documentation efforts. 

For creating start menu links it doesn't matter if there is a bin dir or not so what is the reason for skipping the bin dir ? 

The recent kde distribution is build up to need as little as much efforts for packaging - why should there on windows two different path layouts - one in the main distribution and one in the msi or nsis installers  ?
 
>Currently we (as in KK team) attack the dbus on windows problem.
>Also we try to get experience with cross-compiling kdepim (and the stack under 
>it) for gpg4win. Cross-compilation is interesting to solve several problems
>with builds and distribution for KDE on windows.

>- We need to ship the exact source code, scripts and tools to build each
>  specific binary shipped for GNU (L)GPL licensing. 

As far as i know does the gpl licensing means only to provide the source 
for a related binary, but it does not make the binary releaser 
responsible to provide  all required 3rdparty tools.

Think about msvc builds  -  We build kde software on windows with msvc 
express editions, but we don't provide the ide or the platform sdk - in 
fact ms probably will do not like this
> Thus the packaging tool would need to assemble the source code. 
>   
Not sure what you mean here.
> - We need dependency handling for the source code packages.
>
> Emerge currently cannot do this, Debian or RPM would allow this.
>   
I don't understand why the windows emerge should not be able to do the job.

Ralf