[maemo-developers] Maemo-Optify & Builder Bots = Broken?

[From: Ed Bartosh]

2009/10/24 Graham Cobb <g+770 at cobb.uk.net>:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 11:03:18AM +0300, Ed Bartosh wrote:
>> 2009/10/24 Graham Cobb <g+770 at cobb.uk.net>:
>> > I think sbdmock needs to do the same thing after installing the rootstrap.
>> >
>> I don't think so. It looks like a hack to remove something provided by
>> official SDK image.
>> Why they put this symlink in there if it's not needed and even
>> prevents installation of optified packages?
>> As you can see from my posts deleting it from rootstrap solves the
>> issue. So, obvious way would be to not provide it in rootstrap at all.
>
> I completely agree with you but from a **practical** point of view it is not
> likely to change in the short term (and maybe not at all)!
>
I understand that. That's why I removed /opt from the rootstrap
instead of waiting
for the fix from SDK team.

> And it is definitely a BUG in sbdmock if it is not following the
> instructions included in the documentation of doing a manual rootstrap
> installation.  Whether we agree with it or not, the documentation includes
> instructions for what has to be done after installing the rootstrap.  Of
> course, it should be an option set in the conf file so that it is only
> done for the broken SDKs and can be turned off if it is ever fixed in later
> SDKs.
>
I'm still not sure it's good to remove /opt in sbdmock code.
Sbdmock isn't a tool for building packages only for Maemo, so it
doesn't have to follow instructions specific for one particular
release of SDK for particular platform.
It's general-purpose builder which uses scratchbox as a low level tool
and rootstrap as pre-defined enviromnent for the build. Having
workarounds for specific Maemo SDK bug in it doesn't look good for me.
I like fixing rootstrap more.
However you can send patch to sbdmock author. He might have another opinion.

Marius, can you point us to the bug, please? I'd like to see what SDK
guys say about it.

-- 
BR,
Ed