Page 2 of 2
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 17. May 2010, 10:05
by gapan
Spaces in paths is an abomination and should be banned from existence.
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 17. May 2010, 10:16
by laprjns
Shador wrote:Change slkbuild (and possibly any other shell script) to always use quotes.
JRD wrote:For me, it's a bug (minor) in slkbuild script which should always use double quotes in pathes.
We should be able to use spaces in our pathes if we want/should. Unfortunately, there are a lot of scripts (including mine, I sometimes forget) that do not protect pathes.
Double quotes do work:
Code: Select all
rich[pysolfc]$ ls
./ ../
rich[pysolfc]$ startdir="$(pwd)"
rich[pysolfc]$ cp /etc/slkbuild/SLKBUILD.perl "$startdir"/
rich[pysolfc]$ ls
./ ../ SLKBUILD.perl*
but now I have to consider:
gapan wrote:I'm not sure how smart it is to build packages in a network share, especially a samba share. All sorts of trouble could potentially come up.
Thanks
Rich
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 6. Jul 2010, 21:08
by thenktor
gapan wrote:I'm not sure how smart it is to build packages in a network share, especially a samba share. All sorts of trouble could potentially come up.
I'm using NFS for this task (exporting my build dir to a i486 build host) and I strongly recommend not to use Samba for this. With NFS nothing bad will happen.
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 7. Jul 2010, 09:54
by JRD
I'm using VirtualBox + vbsf for sharing my SLKBUILD and packages.
This way I can easily compile on any version and any architecture supported by VirtualBox (32 and 64 bits for me).
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 7. Jul 2010, 10:12
by laprjns
JRD wrote:I'm using VirtualBox + vbsf for sharing my SLKBUILD and packages.
This way I can easily compile on any version and any architecture supported by VirtualBox (32 and 64 bits for me).
Yes, I abandon the idea of building in a network shared directory and now am also using VirtualBox . Building both 32 and 64 packages running Salix 32 and 64 as VMs on my Salix 32 host using shared files. I can actually have both vm running at the same time, although I haven't try compiling simultaneously yet.
I think this Slkbuild tool is just brilliant and can't understand why ZW is discouraging building packages with buildpkg,
especilly when there is a shortage of people willing to help to build packages.
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 7. Jul 2010, 22:42
by thenktor
JRD wrote:I'm using VirtualBox + vbsf for sharing my SLKBUILD and packages.
This way I can easily compile on any version and any architecture supported by VirtualBox (32 and 64 bits for me).
But building on my old 32 bit machine still is so much faster than using Virtualbox on my more modern 64 bit host...
I think this Slkbuild tool is just brilliant and can't understand why ZW is discouraging building packages with buildpkg,
Without buildpkg I would not have started packaging for Zenwalk. So if they don't want such tools they will lose many possible packagers.
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 8. Jul 2010, 11:44
by Shador
thenktor wrote:But building on my old 32 bit machine still is so much faster than using Virtualbox on my more modern 64 bit host...
I guess a cpu with virtualizsation extension could offset that a bit. Anybody giving them away for free?
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 8. Jul 2010, 12:12
by thenktor
Shador wrote:Anybody giving them away for free?
Anybody is willing to pay 8-core build server for us?
Re: Writing to Newtwork share via slkbuild script
Posted: 8. Jul 2010, 22:29
by laprjns
thenktor wrote:But building on my old 32 bit machine still is so much faster than using Virtualbox on my more modern 64 bit host...
I am running it on a 32 bit host that supports visualization.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103698. Only running one core thought, couldn't get the second core to unlock.