Packaging for other distros

Hi all,
Does anyone create packages for other linux distros exclusively on Arch?
I use cmake's cpack functionality to create windows installers, debs, rpms, and source packages (all on Arch). I've been able able so far to also make debian repos also. Lately I've been trying to see if it's even possible to make PPA's on Arch, but all the tutorials I've come across requires Ubuntu's debuild tool? Has anyone ever tried to do PPA's on Arch?

PirateJonno wrote:Not sure if this is relevant, but I use Arch to make .deb packages for my n900, inside a chroot. However, I have no idea how the thing is actually set up (there is a script that does it automatically). You might be able to just compile the sources you need, but it could become complicated very quickly.
Could you elaborate on this? I have to make and update .deb packages, but being quite the novice at this sort of thing, I use VirtualBox with Debian in it. If there's a way to do that in Arch, that would be an enormous improvement over the current situation

Similar Messages

Can arch binaries be used for other distros

hi,
Can arch binaries be used for other linux distributions like slackware and ubuntu?

Acecero wrote:
karol wrote:
Acecero wrote:
There was a community project that started a while ago where you can create packages for other distros in Arch called unipkg.
Though I don't know if there is any activity anymore...
http://github.com/paradoq/unipkg looks quite fresh.
To me it appears there was no activity since it started 2 months ago. I understand it is a fresh project, just no recent updates.
Ooops, you're right, not much going on there.

[SOLVED] PKGBUILD equivalents for other distros

I'd like to package some of my tools for other distros - mainly .deb and .rpm based for now. Ideally, I'd like to not have to build full packages for each distro, but instead host build scripts or equivalents of PKGBUILDs for other distros. As I am not nearly as well versed in other distros as I am with arch, I'm not sure how to find the needed information to accomplish this.
To take .deb as an example, the pacman rosetta page suggests debuild is the equivalent tool to makepkg. However, the debuild man page indicates that debuild can simply be run within the source tree to build a package. Certainly this can't be the case, unless there are distro-specific files within that source tree that debuild finds and uses. That man page does not indicate what these files are and how they are written.
I have found documentation for creating full binary packages for debian-based distros, but is there an equivalent to a PKGBUILD? I know for Gentoo, ebuilds are well documented and should be quite doable. But frankly I'm pretty sure most gentoo users wouldn't need my help with those. I'm currently primarily targeting .deb as many novice linux users that I'd like to make a couple of my tools available to seem to use ubuntoo.
I suspect I may just be missing the proper documentation and/or am not using the right search terms. Any nudges in the right direction would be appreciated.
(edit: marked 'solved' as I now have the information I needed to get started working on this - but more input can always be handy.)
Last edited by Trilby (2014-01-08 20:34:26)

I recently discovered Debian's `checkinstall` which is very close to what I was looking for. One can easily create a script that will download and install a "non-debianized" source package as a .deb that can be managed by dpkg/apt-get.
Allegedly it can also create rpm packages, but I'm not going to worry about trying that out for a while.
A simple example of a script to allow debian/*buntu users to install one of my packages can be seen here. There is an executable script called `makedeb` - guess what it does. There is also a package-specific file called DEBBUILD - guess what that's for . With just those two files, a debian user could run the script which would get the needed info from the DEBUILD to install the needed dependencies, download and build the source, install under the watch of checkinstall to a temp directory, have checkinstall build a .deb package, remove the builddeps (and optionally all deps installed during the build), and leave them with a *.deb file ready for dpkg.
This instance of makedeb was intentionally made generic so it could work for other packages, however it is also *very* simple and so will not work for all other packages. A DEBBUILD is nearly identical to a PKGBUILD, except the dependency names need to be converted to the debian deps (and there may be many more deps needed as you cannot assume our base/base-devel components are there ... and split -dev packages suck).
Making this DEBBUILD + makedeb made me wonder how hard it would be to convert our own makepkg over to work on top of apt-get/dpkg. I've installed debian (crunchbang) on one of my systems to experiment with this. I've realized there may not be much to it really. I've just completed my revision to the actual makepkg script (and makepkg.conf) to make a full featured makedeb and makedeb.conf. It is not yet tested - and once I test it I may find it is not nearly as complete as I had hoped. But the goal is to allow PKGBUILD -> DEBBUILD conversions to be quite easy (just change the deps).
I may post my full featured makedeb in "community contributions" if/when it passes a few basic tests. It will not run on arch, but it is suited for archers who need to make debs. It may eventually run on arch (there are dpkg is in the AUR, and so is checkinstall, though it is very broken ATM), but this is not a goal of mine.
Last edited by Trilby (2014-05-30 17:37:40)

WIP: Creating packages for other distributions

Hi,
I didn't find any related articles, so I've decided to start work on one:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Us … tributions
Looking for any input (especially about Fedora/RPM). Even telling me such an article would be useless.
Cheers,
Alad
Last edited by Alad (2014-05-30 20:41:08)

Interesting you should post this today. I just started working on 'porting' makepkg to debian (makedeb). My goal as described here is to have a tool that can turn something very much like a PKGBUILD (DEBBUILD, RPMBUILD) into a package for those distros.
My approach will currently run only on the target distro. So perhaps this is a bit of the inverse of your method (me using arch PKGBUILDs in debian to make a .deb rather than you using a tool in archlinux to make a .deb).
I have a bit of a "proof of concept" example that works as intended here and I've now modified the actual makepkg script from pacman to create a full featured (but yet untested) makedeb script.
I'd love to have a tool to make fully compatible .deb or .rpm packages from within archlinux, but I know very little about those packaging standards, and had grown a bit frustrated with their (lack of and/or confusing) documentation while I was trying figure it out.
Last edited by Trilby (2014-05-31 00:46:02)

[Solved] "Clean" font for other distros

as mentioned in this thread, https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=69155 and a few others, the font called "Clean" can be installed from xorg-fonts-misc... but i want this font in debian based crunchbang as well as my arch and gentoo installs. though i have the font in gentoo and arch, i cannot seem to find a font file to copy to my debian.
where can i acquire this font to take with me to my other distros?
or does it simply not exist anywhere as a regular font file?
Last edited by Digit (2011-09-30 23:34:29)

thnx whitehorn, that was the first thing i tried, and i got the same. i too have proggyclean (and several other prog* fonts), but it's not the one i'm looking for.
thnx karol. xlsfonts seems handy. still cant seem to find "Clean" though.
thnx thisoldman. i'm not looking for "one of the clean fonts". i'm looking for "the font called "Clean"", of which, there's only one i'm aware of. from what i could tell, from putting clB6x10.pfc (+.gz) in my fonts directory, it's not the one.
the specific font i'm looking for, shows up in font selection lists, simply named as "Clean". it never changes size (8pt i think), is mono-spaced, and is always pixel perfect.
i've found http://dev-sham.blogspot.com/2011/02/using.html (after searching "font called clean"), but it didnt seem to work.
... i think i'll take this to a more relevent forum... i thought it'd be a simple case of someone telling me "you can get it from /usr/share/somewherelessobvious".

How do i get the installation package for Adobe Bridge

Hello,
Our Creative services Department have taken a Creative Cloud account and they only want to install Adobe Bridge, however when i access the Creative Cloud account there is no installer for Adobe Bridge. Now i believe Bridge is installed as part of the installation package for other Creative Cloud products such as Photoshop, so how would i find the installer package for just Bridge?
Any help greatly appreciated

and it seems like I saw this somewhere,
http://www.adobe.com/products/bridge.html
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-work-with-bridge-cc-and-the-adobe-output-ma.h tml

Grouping Packages for Execution

I have created several packages that are single process focused and would like to execute each in a specfic order. How do I do this? I tried creating a package to process the packages, but that is not allowed.
Do I have to create one hugh package to process everything? I would like to execute package1 then package2, etc. I want to reuse these packages for other processes.
Any help would be appreciated. I'm new to ODI, currently converting HAL Integrations to ODI.
Thanks, Mike

YOU can use scenarios instead.
in a package you can do something like
scen1-->scen2-->scen3...
where scen1 is scenario created from package 1..etc..
hope this helps
Thanks
Venkat

Spotify Debian package for Jessie(testing)

The package that is on spotify repository is not working in Debian Jessie, this is happening because Debian Jessie has libssl1.0.0 and spotify works with libssl0.9.8. I removed the dependency for ssl from the package and i add to data folder the compilied files of libssl and libcrypto. I just sharing this package for other people that using Jessie and have the same problem, until the problem solved officialy from spotiy.
Download the package
http://83.212.107.72/spotify-client_0.9.4.183.g644e24e.428-1_amd64.deb
Install the spotify-client(is only for 64bit)
dpkg -i spotify-client_0.9.4.183.g644e24e.428-1_amd64.deb
The next command is needed if you have missing dependencies
sudo apt-get install -f (maybe you have to install dependencies manualy)

Thanks alot for this solution miza, I recall having to fix this myself manually a few times and it's not fun. Just wanted to let you know that this was greatly appreciated.
And I also appreciate jooon replying to this thread and I'd also like to add that I very much appreciate a Linux client and I can deal with using workarounds like this and having the software slightly out of date, as long as it's still usable :)
Thanks again!

Using ice-Package for import in other systems?

Hi, we would like to import ice-packages into other applications. No specific applications are meant, but we are researching other usage possiblities for our current KM-Content.
What's the format/content of an ice-package?
How can it be read by other applications?
Thanks for your replies.
Best regards
Sandra

hi
An XML based distribution protocol that enables controlled distribution of information from a content provider (syndicator) to a set of subscribers (server to server)
Defines
roles and responsibilities of syndicators and subscribers
format and method for content exchange
Provides support for management and control of    syndication relationship
Catalog           A set of subscription offers. A Subscriber obtains
          a catalog from a Syndicator, and uses the offers within
          the catalog to initiate the ICE subscription protocol.
ICE/HTTP     The specific binding of the ICE protocol to the HTTP protocol.
Package          A single delivery instance of a group of items. For example,
          a single issue of a parts manual or a single set of headlines.
          A package is the atomic unit of information distribution in ICE.
Payload          A protocol structure encapsulating a set of logical ICE
          operations delivered at discrete intervals. An instance
          of an XML document formatted according to the protocol
          definitions contained in this specification.
Subscriber     One of the two parties in an ICE relationship
          (the other one being the Syndicator). The Subscriber uses
          ICE to obtain information and content from the Syndicator.
Subscription     Precise meaning directly related to the corresponding protocol
          data structure; do not confuse the usage of an agreement to
          deliver a package sequence from a Syndicator to a Subscriber.
          There may be many independent subscriptions between a
          Syndicator and a Subscriber.
Subscription offer      A proposed set of parameters for a particular subscription.
          Within ICE, the term subscription offer has the term "offer" in
          this specification with the more generic and abstract concept of
          offers in the business world sense.
Syndicator     One of the two parties in an ICE relationship (the other one
          being the Subscriber). The Syndicator uses ICE to send information
          and content to the Subscriber.
A syndicator bundles content (resources) as offers.
A subscriber requests a catalog of these offers and wishes to subscribe to one of them.
The syndicator assigns a subscription ID and accepts the subscription.
The subscriber pulls content by requesting current state of his subscription.
The syndicator answers with payloads containing packages of items and updates the subscribers state.
Create and edit offers
Assign a delivery method and an automatic delivery schedule to an offer
Admit subscribers
Allow anonymous access to content offers
Maintain syndicator properties (e.g. server name,...)
Establish a connection to a syndicator
Subscribe to an offer in the content catalogue of a syndicator
Edit or delete existing subscriptions
Maintain subscriber properties.
Hope this helps you .please don,t forget to give points
with regards
subrato kundu

[solved] os-prober doesn't find my other distro anymore (for grub2)

Yesterday, I added the lts-kernel to my system.
Doing a grub-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg found both arch kernels, but it can't find my backup distro anymore. (That worked before! Haven't changed anything regarding that.)
The kernel of the other distro is on /dev/sda5 which is mounted, readable and accessible.
Output of:
# os-prober
No volume groups found
The "No volume groups found" message isn't bad, as on my other system, this message appears, too, and the other distro is mentioned after that message.
I know there are many threads about such things here, but nothing helped me. (using grub-customizer, rebooting, updating)
Any ideas?
Last edited by Carl Karl (2014-08-07 15:16:29)

OK, as os-prober doesn't want to work here, I did it the manual way:
I edited /etc/grub.d/40_custom by hand and run grub-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg afterwards.
If it is useful for someone, here is my custom /etc/grub.d/40_custom:
#!/bin/sh
exec tail -n +3 $0
# This file provides an easy way to add custom menu entries. Simply type the
# menu entries you want to add after this comment. Be careful not to change
# the 'exec tail' line above.
menuentry 'Ubuntu, mit Linux 3.8.0-20-generic' {
set root='hd0,msdos5'
linux /boot/vmlinuz-3.8.0-20-generic root=UUID=090171f7-aff2-45d8-a4eb-2e22280ad7bc rw quiet
initrd /boot/initrd.img-3.8.0-20-generic
I got the values from the /boot/grub/grub.cfg of my old ubuntu (yeah, kill me! ;-) ) installation.

Need cvuqdisk rpm package for oracle 10.2.0.1 on IBM PPC..

I need the cvuqdisk rpm package for IBM PPC running Redhat. It is not in the Oracle distro that was downloaded from Oracles site.

You will find almost all the rpm's for any platform from www.rpmfind.net

Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

Arch for me is a perfect distro in that sense, that I know exactly, where all configuration is stored, what every file means and where to dig in case of problems.
But this is true only if I don't use major DEs, such as gnome or kde.
So I want to ask the community, what advantages and disadvantages Arch has against other distros with gnome/kde/etc (not counting rolling-release)?
TNX.
edit:
As for me, Arch's main advantage - simple configuration through text files. I guess it is the same for many Arch users. But not for all.
Why people, who prefer to use kde/gnome use Arch?
Last edited by eDio (2009-10-18 21:40:20)

I use ArchLinux with KDE4 because Arch gives me exactly what I want, no less, no more. KDE4 likes to be bloated and come with loads of useless crap, but not on Arch. Arch divides KDE into modules so I only get EXACTLY what i want. This makes my system fast, entirely customized, and yet it still looks good. Also if I want to remove KDE and install something else, it's extremely easy. Lastly, I love how standard Arch is. Packages are extremely standardized, none of this crap "flavoring"(as I like to call it) other distros employ, which cause more issues than they fix. Here everything is "standard linux". Everything conforms and makes sense, manual editing is simple. The AUR and PKGBUILD system is also absolutely fantastic, and probably my favorite part of the distro(along with tools like yaourt and the fact that most AUR packages also follow the Arch Packaging Standard)

Latest flashplayer package for Linux tar.gz appears to be defective.

Yeah, I know those are strong words, so here's the story:
In the past, the flashplayer package for tar.gz, the only version of flashplayer i know that installs in all Linux distros, has always unzipped into a directory containing two files, one of which is a script.   You CD to the directory, run the script, and flashplayer installs.
Well, suddenly , there is no directory, and no script, just a single library file named flashplayer.so
The installation instructions have not changed, however:
"Installation instructions for tar.gz
Click the download link to begin installation. A dialog box will appear                       asking you where to save the file.
Save the .tar.gz file to your desktop and wait for the file to download                       completely.
Unpackage the file. A directory called install_flash_player_10_linux will be created.
In terminal, navigate to this directory and type ./flashplayer-installer                       to run the installer. Click Enter. The installer will instruct                       you to shut down your browser(s).
Once the installation is complete, the plug-in will be installed in your Mozilla browser. To verify, launch Mozilla and choose Help > About Plug-ins from the browser menu."
The directory is mentioned, and so is the script, but those things aren't in the file anymore. So yeah, something's seriously messed up, and has been for weeks. I'm wondering if someone can maybe tell me if there's a place on the web where I can find the previous version.

11.2.202.346 was and is the last version to be developed for Linux. There won't be any more.

I may be helping Cedega produce a package for Arch... any thoughts?

It is possible I may be helping Cedega produce a *.pkg.tar.gz for their product line. I figured this may be good experience as well as helping out the community, in general. I am aware that some people like Wine and some may like Cedega, in addition. I would like to hear some thoughts on how this would help benefit ArchLinux community. Currently, as I know it, there is only a *.tar.gz file for Archlinux. Which means they have to compile it in order for it to work. However, I feel it would be nice to have a Cedega-<ver>.pkg.tar.gz that people can download. They seemed to be interested in my offer. I wanted to to know what ArchLinux community's opinion, would be, however, before I decide on such an endeavour. All comments are appreciated, of course!
P.S. Should I have a Poll on this?

smitty wrote:
Well, I didn't realize that apparently it's "already done"! I just checked on this site:
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?d … s=0&SeB=nd
And, I believe it is the current version. However, on the Cedega forum, not many are aware that it exists for this distro. Perhaps I may just "spread the awareness".
Oops! I just now realized that it's still not in *.pkg.tar.gz format. Does this mean I should continue with my original intent?
There is no reason to offer a pkg.tar.gz file of cedega, that is what the AUR and makepkg is for. You alter the PKGBUILD to however you like and then run the command makepkg in the directory of the PKGBUILD and when its done u will have a compiled binary.
No need for anyone to host a binary package, anyone wanting to use cedega has a computer that is easily capable to compile the program with makepkg.
TO ANY DEV THAT READS THIS: this is what I mean by awareness of the AUR. AUR is the answer to all this OP's questions yet he is unaware of the process to complete such task. Just another friendly reminder.
Last edited by jacko (2008-02-07 03:53:43)

Why do applications have to be packaged for each distribution?

Hi,
Sorry this is probably a stupid question, but i don't understand why it's necessary for each application to be packaged (and patched) by each distribution.
Example: (as i understand it) Mozilla Firefox. Arch has it's own version derived from Mozilla's, and so do the other distributions with their own variations.
Is anyone able to explain how this works and why it's done this way?
Bonus points: If anyone has a link to an article explaining in detail, would be very interesting to read

When packaging software there are a bunch of questions you're facing. Many have been mentioned before.
This starts with the compile-time configuration regarding which parts of the software should be compiled/used, eg some libraries can use different backends and you can only choose one. Sometimes it's even a matter of licensing. Some distros like to enable experimental features if they don't break the rest of the software, some let you choose (like gentoo's useflags mentioned above).
Filesystem layouts differ: Some prefer /usr/lib/pkgconfig, some /usr/share/pkgconfig; some like /usr/libexec, some don't, some (eg FreeBSD, which isn't linux but with regard to package management faces the same questions) use /usr/local for packages. Some distinguish between binary-only packages by putting them into /opt, some don't. Some actually have /bin, /usr/bin and /usr/local/bin as separate directories
Or you might go a completely different way, too, nobody's forcing you to stick to "standards". I'd also like to point to haiku, also not a linux distro, but there too you have most of the same software packages available, which have to follow different directions there, too.
Default configurations: Some get patched (themed for the distro or for other reasons), some don't.
Init systems: Gentoo (at least last time I checked) defaults to openrc. Most people do not provide openrc scripts in their source repositories, so the packager is responsible for creating these.
Gentoo actually brings up another thing: it allows for some packages to have multiple versions installed, and you can use them explicitly and/or switch your default with `eselect`. (It probably does more than that, I haven't used gentoo in years.) For this of course you need to package your software in a certain way. Eg put your binaries and libraries into a separate folder and symlink them to their desired locations, rather than installing them there directly, since they'd be overwritten by the other versions of the package...

Packaging for other distros

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for