[packman] An advice regarding Kodi packages
sagiben at gmail.com
Mon Feb 22 20:53:22 CET 2016
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Stefan Botter <jsj at jsj.dyndns.org> wrote:
> Hi Sagi,
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 09:44:06 +0200
> Sagi Ben-Akiva <sagiben at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Kodi Jarvis 16.0 was released yesterday, and it is already being
> > built in my home project.
> > https://pmbs.links2linux.de/package/show/home:sagiben/kodi.binary-addons
> > https://pmbs.links2linux.de/package/show/home:sagiben/kodi
> > In latest Kodi, all the binary addons were branched out from Kodi
> > github repository to a separate repositories.
> > I did the same and divided Kodi and it's binary addons into 2
> > packages : kodi, kodi.binary-addons.
> > My questions are :
> > 1. Do you think we should keep them in 2 separate projects or merge
> > them to one ?
> > 2. Should we provide a standalone package for each binary addon ?
> I would prefer option 1 - at least for the moment. I do not know how
> other distributions handle this, but it might be a dependency nightmare
> if any binary addon is separate.
Kodi team builds the packages for Ubuntu and they have a single package for
Fedora does the same :
I can create an autogenerate spec file for the binary addons which will
build all binary addons and put them in a separate package for each addons.
> Just a question: you have also kodi-pvr.addons in your repo, is this a
> subset of the binary.addons?
from Kodi 15.0 all pvr binary addons were moved out from Kodi github
repository (the repo still have the name xbmc)
and were taken out from xbmc tar file, kodi build mechanism was modified to
clone each addon and build it. Other binary addons like screensaver etc.
were left in kodi repository.
In Kodi 16.0 all binary addons were moved to separate repositories and are
being built in the same way.
packman and obs do not allow to run git during the build process so we had
to come up with a script which pre-process xbmc addons build mechanism and
download the tarballs for us.
pvr.addons rpm will be replaced by binary-addons rpm.
There are pros and cons for each option :
1. Kodi code changes more frequently than the binary addons we do not need
to build everything on each change.
2. rpm size are ~ 20MB each, user can decide to install both or just the
core. If we will have separate package for every addon the user will be
able to install just the addons that he needs. I, for instance, use Kodi
for more than 4 years and uses 2 or 3 maybe 4 binary addons out of 53.
1. Kodi code is needs for both projects
2. Modification for different architectures will be needs in both projects
3. Maintaining dependencies
4. One project to rule them all
> Stefan Botter zu Hause
> Packman mailing list
> Packman at links2linux.de
More information about the Packman