Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Apt repository version #24

Open
Stateford opened this issue Oct 12, 2020 · 8 comments
Open

Update Apt repository version #24

Stateford opened this issue Oct 12, 2020 · 8 comments
Assignees

Comments

@Stateford
Copy link

I attempted to use the apt-get repo for avra and there were missing includes.

m328Pdef.inc to be specific. I had to uninstall and clone this repo to get a package that included the correct file. I think it would be a good idea to consider updating the ubuntu repo's if possible.

@Ro5bert Ro5bert self-assigned this Oct 13, 2020
@Ro5bert
Copy link
Owner

Ro5bert commented Oct 13, 2020

I wasn't even aware it was on Ubuntu's repo. Thanks for letting me know. I'll try to update it.

@bwack
Copy link

bwack commented Oct 23, 2020

I second this. Great idea to update the apt repo. I'm on ubuntu 20, and the avra version I have is from 2010. The -o output file name option has no effect. I was compiling for two targets in one makefile so I had to use the move command, until I found that avra was on github. It compiles really easily from source too :)
Great project, thanks for keeping it alive !

@mase76
Copy link

mase76 commented Oct 30, 2020

The same issue in Debian.

@Ro5bert
Copy link
Owner

Ro5bert commented Nov 1, 2020

@mase76 Yeah, the Ubuntu package is inherited from Debian. There's actually an open bug from 5 September about AVRA on Debian (and, hence, distros derived from Debian) being outdated and still using the old Sourceforge upstream, but the maintainer hasn't responded. I'm new to Debian packaging, so I'm not sure exactly what the procedure is for dealing with unresponsive maintainers. However, there's a wiki page suggesting that it may take multiple months of trying to contact the old maintainer before they are removed/the package is handed off or orphaned.

@mase76
Copy link

mase76 commented Nov 1, 2020

I think, for a good packaging, the project needs a build system like cmake or similar. Otherwise the prefix path in the Makefile has to be patched. There is also no dependency check.

@Ro5bert
Copy link
Owner

Ro5bert commented Nov 1, 2020

I am reluctant to use CMake, but from what I've read, it should be fairly easy to set up the debian package so it sets the prefix to /usr instead of /usr/local when building, so I don't think that's a big issue. As for dependencies, there aren't any besides libc and unistd.h (which does pose a problem for non-POSIX systems, but a workaround has been addressed here).

@majekw
Copy link

majekw commented Nov 1, 2020

@mase76 , there is no need to patch prefix since about year. Look for Slackware packaging script for example: https://slackbuilds.org/slackbuilds/14.2/development/avra/avra.SlackBuild

@Ro5bert
Copy link
Owner

Ro5bert commented Jan 27, 2021

I suppose I should update this, seeing as quite a few people are/were interested. I did email the old maintainer of the Debian package a while back and got no response, so I guess it's safe to say he's no longer interested in maintaining the Debian package and someone else should maintain it. However, I started working in December on AVRA 2.0, which is a rewrite of certain parts (most) of the internals (they are currently messy and full of bugs), and I don't think I'll be pursuing updating the Debian package until that's finished. If somebody else with experience in Debian packaging wanted to go through the process of trying to update the Debian package, that'd be great.

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

No branches or pull requests

5 participants