#redo — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #redo, aggregated by home.social.
-
Ok, I think just I found my obsession for the next few days : ** redo ** [1,2]
It has a very simple (yet powerful) approach to the build system problems.
The question is now : how can I abuse it to describe and run my experiments workflows ? 😈
[1] Original post : https://cr.yp.to/redo.html
[2] Reimplementation but with nice documentation / discussion : https://redo.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ -
Ok, I think just I found my obsession for the next few days : ** redo ** [1,2]
It has a very simple (yet powerful) approach to the build system problems.
The question is now : how can I abuse it to describe and run my experiments workflows ? 😈
[1] Original post : https://cr.yp.to/redo.html
[2] Reimplementation but with nice documentation / discussion : https://redo.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ -
Excellent.
Yes, the latest released versions are supposed to be a version behind the actual development source. I freeze the source, do a binaries release, and start a new development version.
So #redo latest binary release is 1.5, and #nosh is 1.41.
#djbwares is at version 12, with version 13 under development. I must have forgotten to update the WWW page.
-
Excellent.
Yes, the latest released versions are supposed to be a version behind the actual development source. I freeze the source, do a binaries release, and start a new development version.
So #redo latest binary release is 1.5, and #nosh is 1.41.
#djbwares is at version 12, with version 13 under development. I must have forgotten to update the WWW page.
-
Excellent.
Yes, the latest released versions are supposed to be a version behind the actual development source. I freeze the source, do a binaries release, and start a new development version.
So #redo latest binary release is 1.5, and #nosh is 1.41.
#djbwares is at version 12, with version 13 under development. I must have forgotten to update the WWW page.
-
Excellent.
Yes, the latest released versions are supposed to be a version behind the actual development source. I freeze the source, do a binaries release, and start a new development version.
So #redo latest binary release is 1.5, and #nosh is 1.41.
#djbwares is at version 12, with version 13 under development. I must have forgotten to update the WWW page.
-
Excellent.
Yes, the latest released versions are supposed to be a version behind the actual development source. I freeze the source, do a binaries release, and start a new development version.
So #redo latest binary release is 1.5, and #nosh is 1.41.
#djbwares is at version 12, with version 13 under development. I must have forgotten to update the WWW page.
-
Ack. I didn't rinse the top of my coffee mug out well enough, apparently, and it tastes like fucking soap.
#REDO -
Ack. I didn't rinse the top of my coffee mug out well enough, apparently, and it tastes like fucking soap.
#REDO -
Ack. I didn't rinse the top of my coffee mug out well enough, apparently, and it tastes like fucking soap.
#REDO -
Ack. I didn't rinse the top of my coffee mug out well enough, apparently, and it tastes like fucking soap.
#REDO -
Ack. I didn't rinse the top of my coffee mug out well enough, apparently, and it tastes like fucking soap.
#REDO -
@JdeBP I can confirm that redo-1.5, djbwares-11, and nosh-1.41 build packages just fine on both #FreeBSD 13.5 and 14.3.
Build logs on 14.3 in case you end up spotting something interesting:
- redo-1.5: https://gist.github.com/ermo/98d627c15c7768e16c42d460356bbd7e
- djbwares-11: https://gist.github.com/ermo/238af242324aabca481bb9ebd37e1ff4
- nosh-1.41: https://gist.github.com/ermo/166ecefe1599104e668cf7dafd833263 -
@JdeBP I can confirm that redo-1.5, djbwares-11, and nosh-1.41 build packages just fine on both #FreeBSD 13.5 and 14.3.
Build logs on 14.3 in case you end up spotting something interesting:
- redo-1.5: https://gist.github.com/ermo/98d627c15c7768e16c42d460356bbd7e
- djbwares-11: https://gist.github.com/ermo/238af242324aabca481bb9ebd37e1ff4
- nosh-1.41: https://gist.github.com/ermo/166ecefe1599104e668cf7dafd833263 -
@JdeBP I can confirm that redo-1.5, djbwares-11, and nosh-1.41 build packages just fine on both #FreeBSD 13.5 and 14.3.
Build logs on 14.3 in case you end up spotting something interesting:
- redo-1.5: https://gist.github.com/ermo/98d627c15c7768e16c42d460356bbd7e
- djbwares-11: https://gist.github.com/ermo/238af242324aabca481bb9ebd37e1ff4
- nosh-1.41: https://gist.github.com/ermo/166ecefe1599104e668cf7dafd833263 -
@JdeBP I can confirm that redo-1.5, djbwares-11, and nosh-1.41 build packages just fine on both #FreeBSD 13.5 and 14.3.
Build logs on 14.3 in case you end up spotting something interesting:
- redo-1.5: https://gist.github.com/ermo/98d627c15c7768e16c42d460356bbd7e
- djbwares-11: https://gist.github.com/ermo/238af242324aabca481bb9ebd37e1ff4
- nosh-1.41: https://gist.github.com/ermo/166ecefe1599104e668cf7dafd833263 -
@JdeBP I can confirm that redo-1.5, djbwares-11, and nosh-1.41 build packages just fine on both #FreeBSD 13.5 and 14.3.
Build logs on 14.3 in case you end up spotting something interesting:
- redo-1.5: https://gist.github.com/ermo/98d627c15c7768e16c42d460356bbd7e
- djbwares-11: https://gist.github.com/ermo/238af242324aabca481bb9ebd37e1ff4
- nosh-1.41: https://gist.github.com/ermo/166ecefe1599104e668cf7dafd833263 -
That may well be useful.
#redo version 1.2 (sic!) is in the #FreeBSD ports tree. I was just talking to @schmonz about the state of that port and how I have no real way to let the person behind it know that it's in very poor shape.
Neither #djbwares nor #nosh are in the FreeBSD ports tree. Presumably there are people working on ports, but that one of them was a decade ago an undergraduate on the other side of the planet shows the kind of barriers in place here.
-
That may well be useful.
#redo version 1.2 (sic!) is in the #FreeBSD ports tree. I was just talking to @schmonz about the state of that port and how I have no real way to let the person behind it know that it's in very poor shape.
Neither #djbwares nor #nosh are in the FreeBSD ports tree. Presumably there are people working on ports, but that one of them was a decade ago an undergraduate on the other side of the planet shows the kind of barriers in place here.
-
That may well be useful.
#redo version 1.2 (sic!) is in the #FreeBSD ports tree. I was just talking to @schmonz about the state of that port and how I have no real way to let the person behind it know that it's in very poor shape.
Neither #djbwares nor #nosh are in the FreeBSD ports tree. Presumably there are people working on ports, but that one of them was a decade ago an undergraduate on the other side of the planet shows the kind of barriers in place here.
-
That may well be useful.
#redo version 1.2 (sic!) is in the #FreeBSD ports tree. I was just talking to @schmonz about the state of that port and how I have no real way to let the person behind it know that it's in very poor shape.
Neither #djbwares nor #nosh are in the FreeBSD ports tree. Presumably there are people working on ports, but that one of them was a decade ago an undergraduate on the other side of the planet shows the kind of barriers in place here.
-
That may well be useful.
#redo version 1.2 (sic!) is in the #FreeBSD ports tree. I was just talking to @schmonz about the state of that port and how I have no real way to let the person behind it know that it's in very poor shape.
Neither #djbwares nor #nosh are in the FreeBSD ports tree. Presumably there are people working on ports, but that one of them was a decade ago an undergraduate on the other side of the planet shows the kind of barriers in place here.
-
I actually looked for contact details for Po-Chuan Hsieh, for the FreeBSD port, so that I could let xem know how messed up that port was; as I noted before. But there's only a wildly (a decade) out of date LinkedIn listing and an opaque FreeBSD account.
The Parabola packaging of redo is several versions out of date, and has the pre-pre-Brexit URLs. Arch is on 1.4 at least but using the pre-Brexit URLs.
I don't even know about Void, Hyperbola, et al.
-
I actually looked for contact details for Po-Chuan Hsieh, for the FreeBSD port, so that I could let xem know how messed up that port was; as I noted before. But there's only a wildly (a decade) out of date LinkedIn listing and an opaque FreeBSD account.
The Parabola packaging of redo is several versions out of date, and has the pre-pre-Brexit URLs. Arch is on 1.4 at least but using the pre-Brexit URLs.
I don't even know about Void, Hyperbola, et al.
-
I actually looked for contact details for Po-Chuan Hsieh, for the FreeBSD port, so that I could let xem know how messed up that port was; as I noted before. But there's only a wildly (a decade) out of date LinkedIn listing and an opaque FreeBSD account.
The Parabola packaging of redo is several versions out of date, and has the pre-pre-Brexit URLs. Arch is on 1.4 at least but using the pre-Brexit URLs.
I don't even know about Void, Hyperbola, et al.
-
I actually looked for contact details for Po-Chuan Hsieh, for the FreeBSD port, so that I could let xem know how messed up that port was; as I noted before. But there's only a wildly (a decade) out of date LinkedIn listing and an opaque FreeBSD account.
The Parabola packaging of redo is several versions out of date, and has the pre-pre-Brexit URLs. Arch is on 1.4 at least but using the pre-Brexit URLs.
I don't even know about Void, Hyperbola, et al.
-
I actually looked for contact details for Po-Chuan Hsieh, for the FreeBSD port, so that I could let xem know how messed up that port was; as I noted before. But there's only a wildly (a decade) out of date LinkedIn listing and an opaque FreeBSD account.
The Parabola packaging of redo is several versions out of date, and has the pre-pre-Brexit URLs. Arch is on 1.4 at least but using the pre-Brexit URLs.
I don't even know about Void, Hyperbola, et al.
-
I think that you possibly hadn't noticed before because it wasn't NetBSD; but now I've ported all three of #redo, #djbwares, and #nosh to NetBSD (testing on a non-amd64 architecture, no less!), as you've probably seen over the past few months. So now there's a system for building #NetBSD packages alongside Debian's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's.
-
I think that you possibly hadn't noticed before because it wasn't NetBSD; but now I've ported all three of #redo, #djbwares, and #nosh to NetBSD (testing on a non-amd64 architecture, no less!), as you've probably seen over the past few months. So now there's a system for building #NetBSD packages alongside Debian's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's.
-
I think that you possibly hadn't noticed before because it wasn't NetBSD; but now I've ported all three of #redo, #djbwares, and #nosh to NetBSD (testing on a non-amd64 architecture, no less!), as you've probably seen over the past few months. So now there's a system for building #NetBSD packages alongside Debian's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's.
-
I think that you possibly hadn't noticed before because it wasn't NetBSD; but now I've ported all three of #redo, #djbwares, and #nosh to NetBSD (testing on a non-amd64 architecture, no less!), as you've probably seen over the past few months. So now there's a system for building #NetBSD packages alongside Debian's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's.
-
I think that you possibly hadn't noticed before because it wasn't NetBSD; but now I've ported all three of #redo, #djbwares, and #nosh to NetBSD (testing on a non-amd64 architecture, no less!), as you've probably seen over the past few months. So now there's a system for building #NetBSD packages alongside Debian's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's.
-
It has always been capable of building its own packages, by the way. (And since it's slashpackage, one can by design just package/compile it self-contained and not do the subsequent packaging step.)
https://jdebp.uk/FGA/slashpackage.html#OSPackaging
It's not a Debian thing. Quite the opposite. For a long time no-one packaged any of this at all, so I made packages for people myself. Even now, no-one at all packages djbwares and there is only one that packages nosh.
-
It has always been capable of building its own packages, by the way. (And since it's slashpackage, one can by design just package/compile it self-contained and not do the subsequent packaging step.)
https://jdebp.uk/FGA/slashpackage.html#OSPackaging
It's not a Debian thing. Quite the opposite. For a long time no-one packaged any of this at all, so I made packages for people myself. Even now, no-one at all packages djbwares and there is only one that packages nosh.
-
It has always been capable of building its own packages, by the way. (And since it's slashpackage, one can by design just package/compile it self-contained and not do the subsequent packaging step.)
https://jdebp.uk/FGA/slashpackage.html#OSPackaging
It's not a Debian thing. Quite the opposite. For a long time no-one packaged any of this at all, so I made packages for people myself. Even now, no-one at all packages djbwares and there is only one that packages nosh.
-
It has always been capable of building its own packages, by the way. (And since it's slashpackage, one can by design just package/compile it self-contained and not do the subsequent packaging step.)
https://jdebp.uk/FGA/slashpackage.html#OSPackaging
It's not a Debian thing. Quite the opposite. For a long time no-one packaged any of this at all, so I made packages for people myself. Even now, no-one at all packages djbwares and there is only one that packages nosh.
-
It has always been capable of building its own packages, by the way. (And since it's slashpackage, one can by design just package/compile it self-contained and not do the subsequent packaging step.)
https://jdebp.uk/FGA/slashpackage.html#OSPackaging
It's not a Debian thing. Quite the opposite. For a long time no-one packaged any of this at all, so I made packages for people myself. Even now, no-one at all packages djbwares and there is only one that packages nosh.
-
I'm curious how knowledge of the 1.5 source archive even reached any packagers.
That was not listed on the WWW pages at all but only on a GOPHER site that's explicitly for people to get bonus content such as access to in-development source, and comes with an explicit warning in the GOPHER menu.
The published source archives listed on the WWW, as well as the GitHub snapshot, were still at 1.4. I had only just ticked them over to 1.5 when I sent that nudge out. (-:
-
I'm curious how knowledge of the 1.5 source archive even reached any packagers.
That was not listed on the WWW pages at all but only on a GOPHER site that's explicitly for people to get bonus content such as access to in-development source, and comes with an explicit warning in the GOPHER menu.
The published source archives listed on the WWW, as well as the GitHub snapshot, were still at 1.4. I had only just ticked them over to 1.5 when I sent that nudge out. (-:
-
I'm curious how knowledge of the 1.5 source archive even reached any packagers.
That was not listed on the WWW pages at all but only on a GOPHER site that's explicitly for people to get bonus content such as access to in-development source, and comes with an explicit warning in the GOPHER menu.
The published source archives listed on the WWW, as well as the GitHub snapshot, were still at 1.4. I had only just ticked them over to 1.5 when I sent that nudge out. (-:
-
I'm curious how knowledge of the 1.5 source archive even reached any packagers.
That was not listed on the WWW pages at all but only on a GOPHER site that's explicitly for people to get bonus content such as access to in-development source, and comes with an explicit warning in the GOPHER menu.
The published source archives listed on the WWW, as well as the GitHub snapshot, were still at 1.4. I had only just ticked them over to 1.5 when I sent that nudge out. (-:
-
I'm curious how knowledge of the 1.5 source archive even reached any packagers.
That was not listed on the WWW pages at all but only on a GOPHER site that's explicitly for people to get bonus content such as access to in-development source, and comes with an explicit warning in the GOPHER menu.
The published source archives listed on the WWW, as well as the GitHub snapshot, were still at 1.4. I had only just ticked them over to 1.5 when I sent that nudge out. (-:
-
I'm doing #djbwares 10 next; right now, in fact (although I need to make a trip to the shops).
When I put it out, that's a good intermediate step to try next. It will test that you have a working redo without being a massive build that builds hundreds of things (as is the case for nosh).
It has the same basic command workflow as for building redo. There's a new accompanying Guide that details building from source but there aren't any real surprises over building #redo.
-
I'm doing #djbwares 10 next; right now, in fact (although I need to make a trip to the shops).
When I put it out, that's a good intermediate step to try next. It will test that you have a working redo without being a massive build that builds hundreds of things (as is the case for nosh).
It has the same basic command workflow as for building redo. There's a new accompanying Guide that details building from source but there aren't any real surprises over building #redo.
-
I'm doing #djbwares 10 next; right now, in fact (although I need to make a trip to the shops).
When I put it out, that's a good intermediate step to try next. It will test that you have a working redo without being a massive build that builds hundreds of things (as is the case for nosh).
It has the same basic command workflow as for building redo. There's a new accompanying Guide that details building from source but there aren't any real surprises over building #redo.
-
I'm doing #djbwares 10 next; right now, in fact (although I need to make a trip to the shops).
When I put it out, that's a good intermediate step to try next. It will test that you have a working redo without being a massive build that builds hundreds of things (as is the case for nosh).
It has the same basic command workflow as for building redo. There's a new accompanying Guide that details building from source but there aren't any real surprises over building #redo.
-
I'm doing #djbwares 10 next; right now, in fact (although I need to make a trip to the shops).
When I put it out, that's a good intermediate step to try next. It will test that you have a working redo without being a massive build that builds hundreds of things (as is the case for nosh).
It has the same basic command workflow as for building redo. There's a new accompanying Guide that details building from source but there aren't any real surprises over building #redo.
-
That's possibly a good approach with 1.41, until I sort out the #GhostBSD machine.
You can take the first step in trying it again, right now. #redo version 1.5 is out.
(Ignore the one in ports. Whoever is in charge of that hasn't made it past version 1.2 and is still using a WWW site that preceded the WWW site that I lost to Brexit half a decade ago.)
As you can see from package/debian/control it has a build dependency upon perl; but I think that that and base are all that you need.
