Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Installation:
Gentoo Handbook
Installation Docs

Documentation:
Home
Listing
About Gentoo
Philosophy
Social Contract

Resources:
Bug Tracker
Developer List
Discussion Forums
Gentoo BitTorrents
Gentoo Linux Enhancement Proposals
IRC Channels
Mailing Lists
Mirrors
Name and Logo Guidelines
Online Package Database
Security Announcements
Staffing Needs
Supporting Vendors
View our CVS

Graphics:
Logos and themes
Icons
ScreenShots

Miscellaneous Resources:
Gentoo Linux Store
Gentoo-hosted projects
IBM dW/Intel article archive




List Archive: gentoo-soc
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-soc: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab@...>, gentoo-soc@g.o, gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Mounir Lamouri <volkmar@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:20:36 +0200
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> Am Montag, 15. Juni 2009 22:51:52 schrieb Mounir Lamouri:
>   
>> I'm working on a portage backend for PackageKit.
>>     
>
> Could you give us a small status update? 
>
> Does your backend already work? 
>
> Best wishes, 
> Arn
Hi,

It has been a while without weekly updates even if my mentor suffers^W
benefits of frequent updates, I didn't get really interesting things to
be said here.
Actually, I had some issues with the last functions I had to re-write.

The backend is now ready. You should be able to do anything in a
beta/realease candidate quality.
Even if I think there are still two features that can (timely speaking)
and need (user's point of view speaking) to be added:
- configuration file update
- messages / warning / errors show
They are not critical for testing but only for a daily usage.

I've already done the portage work for the first feature but I will have
to add signal to packagekit because even if debian also needs it, it
hasn't been implemented yet. The bad thing is GUI will probably not
manage this feature since a quite long time.
The second feature shouldn't be really hard.

About the packaging. I've worked on a packagekit ebuild and even if I
didn't take time to add it to the tree it could be done without a lot of
work but there is not real need at the moment because -as I said before-
without a GUI, packagekit is quite useless and last version of
gnome-packagekit needs a version gnome-policykit that is not in the tree.
As the backend should now be working correctly for a real usage it will
probably add packagekit live ebuild in the tree but if you want to test
the backend, I recommand you to clone packagekit and gnome-packakit
repositories, it will be easier ;)

After these two features, I will probably have some small things and
bugs and I will move to big things for packagekit or portage needed to
make the backend better. Indeed, there are a lot of things I've listed
that are not really needed for a working backend and too big to be part
of the gsoc. For example, merging layman into portage (actually, API
will be easy but UI probably less) and having a non-verbose portage API
because backends are using stdout for signals.

If by any chance, you test the backend, do not hesitate to contact me
for bug reports or comments.

Thanks,
Mounir


Replies:
Re: Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
-- Arne Babenhauserheide
References:
[gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
-- Mounir Lamouri
Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
-- Arne Babenhauserheide
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-soc: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
Next by thread:
Re: Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
Previous by date:
Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit
Next by date:
Re: [GSoC-status] Collagen - database schema and further changes


Updated Sep 12, 2009

Donate to support our development efforts.

Gentoo Centric Hosting: vr.org

VR Hosted

Tek Alchemy

Tek Alchemy

SevenL.net

SevenL.net

php|architect

php|architect

Copyright 2001-2007 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Email www@gentoo.org.