| 1 |
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Montag, 15. Juni 2009 22:51:52 schrieb Mounir Lamouri: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> I'm working on a portage backend for PackageKit. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Could you give us a small status update? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Does your backend already work? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Best wishes, |
| 12 |
> Arn |
| 13 |
Hi, |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
It has been a while without weekly updates even if my mentor suffers^W |
| 16 |
benefits of frequent updates, I didn't get really interesting things to |
| 17 |
be said here. |
| 18 |
Actually, I had some issues with the last functions I had to re-write. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The backend is now ready. You should be able to do anything in a |
| 21 |
beta/realease candidate quality. |
| 22 |
Even if I think there are still two features that can (timely speaking) |
| 23 |
and need (user's point of view speaking) to be added: |
| 24 |
- configuration file update |
| 25 |
- messages / warning / errors show |
| 26 |
They are not critical for testing but only for a daily usage. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I've already done the portage work for the first feature but I will have |
| 29 |
to add signal to packagekit because even if debian also needs it, it |
| 30 |
hasn't been implemented yet. The bad thing is GUI will probably not |
| 31 |
manage this feature since a quite long time. |
| 32 |
The second feature shouldn't be really hard. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
About the packaging. I've worked on a packagekit ebuild and even if I |
| 35 |
didn't take time to add it to the tree it could be done without a lot of |
| 36 |
work but there is not real need at the moment because -as I said before- |
| 37 |
without a GUI, packagekit is quite useless and last version of |
| 38 |
gnome-packagekit needs a version gnome-policykit that is not in the tree. |
| 39 |
As the backend should now be working correctly for a real usage it will |
| 40 |
probably add packagekit live ebuild in the tree but if you want to test |
| 41 |
the backend, I recommand you to clone packagekit and gnome-packakit |
| 42 |
repositories, it will be easier ;) |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
After these two features, I will probably have some small things and |
| 45 |
bugs and I will move to big things for packagekit or portage needed to |
| 46 |
make the backend better. Indeed, there are a lot of things I've listed |
| 47 |
that are not really needed for a working backend and too big to be part |
| 48 |
of the gsoc. For example, merging layman into portage (actually, API |
| 49 |
will be easy but UI probably less) and having a non-verbose portage API |
| 50 |
because backends are using stdout for signals. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
If by any chance, you test the backend, do not hesitate to contact me |
| 53 |
for bug reports or comments. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Thanks, |
| 56 |
Mounir |
Archives