PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Hi all,

Okay so the autobuilder has been updated to the 1.2 SDK... therefore if I upload a package in there, it'll be compiled with Qt 4.6... but my device doesn't have the dependencies for the version of Qt 4.6 the package is built with, and I can't seem to get them via apt.

Is it really the case that new packages uploaded to the autobuilder are uninstallable until PR1.2 comes out?

Stewart

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

answer is Yes, many threads discuss this. :)

this might just work for some apps.(its only a hack, and a bad one )
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...495#post588495

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

The community is trying to discuss possible solutions here:

http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/mae...il/025765.html

The options outlined are:

Many more details are in the mailing list post.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

I might be dumb asking this, but now that PR1.2 will be released, how can I update my program to those who choose NOT to upgrade their tablet?

Aniello

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

I think there is already another repo created for PR1.2 knowm as fremantle-1.2, so I suppose we can add this as a repository on our devices if we continue to make branches like these :). ( i honestly hope not ! :p )

But then I dont think at the moment the autobuilder builds on both PR1.1 and PR1.2 and send them to each of these repos, that will also need to be done I guess.

so in short, I dont think it can be done :( as it is now , or can it , debmasters ?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Well today I've uploaded Xournal to Extras-devel and the only choice was "fremantle". I was actually expecting to find "fremantle 1.1" and "fremantle 1.2" or something similar to let me address a specific set of users.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

I think the redirection choice isnt there 'coz its been handled internally to redirect to fremanlte-1.2.
For -devel and -test the autobuilder builds against PR1.2 and uploads the existing repos, which is why the problem of broken packages.
Only extras , AFAIK, has this fremantle1.2 repo, where the packages being promoted from -test gets routed auto.

so we wont get those updates from extras until PR1.2 is released.

This is what I think is the status.

*EDIT*
Btw, just to let you know, that was exactly my suggestion in the mailing list to let the user decide which SDK and repo he wishes to target, and choice be given as a debain package control field :).

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

That would help I think.. need to think more on the issue.

As you put it, it looks like (and reality confirms) that users can't have -devel and -testing for PR1.1 while they can (of course) choose to remain on PR1.1 but only get updated from Extras.

From this POV it seems the best solution would be to have PR1.1 -devel and -testing along with PR1.2 -devel and -testing as well.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

just noticed a wiki page on this issue discussed in the mailing lists.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

A partial solution enforcing older versions to dpkg-shlibdeps can be found here:
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p...7&postcount=15

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Just a small correction - it was PR1.0 -devel, not PR1.1. When PR1.1 SDK was released, the autobuilder was upgraded, and the same problem arose, the solution back then was immediate return of the autoduilder to PR1.0 SDK, which it remained the case until PR1.2 SDK was released, and someone forgot the lesson that was learned a few months ago.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

In all cases, just because the user has the option to choose, we need to have a means for our updates to address the needs of those users.

May be this place, however, is not the right one to discuss?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

I am surprised that there isn't more frustration here about essentially broken autobuilder. Because I definitely am frustrated about the situation.

At this point I would say it was a mistake to change autobuilder to new SDK so soon. Maybe it could still be reverted to the old SDK? Having 80% (number made up) of applications broken or not being able to upgrade them is not worth of anything what was intented with builder change.

At least I'm sure that next time we will wait for the real release.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

is there a choice ?, i would definetely want it rolled back.
I for sure dont want to use the PR1.2 until I know a release date, or atleast there is an assurance from Nokia that the formal image of the OS is released within x weeks of the SDK or something along those lines.
Can the community council do something about it , if there is a fair share of support for it , the rollback of autobuilder I mean ?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

one of solutions to make your own build on old SDK and to use local repo(at your computer). as i understand it right

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

ZogG , the problem is mainly about the autobuilder, the issue that we cannot upload anysome packages to the repository(due to dependency issues being discussed in the forums since it builds using PR1.2.
Of course, we can still continue developing locally with the old SDK if you choose not to upgrade. :)

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

From and user (not developer) perspective, this is getting very frustrating. I now have around 8 apps that I can not update in my app manager list. So now when I get an update notification, I have to scroll through the list to find it (and get reminded of all the apps I can't update). Sometimes the newest update works, but more often it fails.

Since I don't follow the mailing lists, it seems (not that this is true) that there is very little concern or work being done to fix the situation. I believe that we're going on three weeks now for this problem. Both users and developers are getting frustrated.

Surely, there is a priority to resolve the isssue? Or are we simply waiting and praying that Nokia will release PR1.2 soon and resolve at least some of the issues?

Any pointers on where to look for updated progress?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

The people who are saying that this is only a problem for developers and not users, I would suggest reconsidering your position. If the developer needs to deliver an important security update or a data loss prevention update, he is unable to do so, leaving them with an option to not use an application for over a month, of course in a fairy-tale land where early warnings are delivered to users.

I would like to know what was the basis for the decision to switch the autobuilder to PR1.2 on that specific date rather than, for example, today? Qt applications would be updated by any caring developer within days of PR1.2 release, no other applications would have been affected. Now both hildon and qt applications are affected and have been for several weeks, leaving developers and users frustrated. This is a miniscule community compared to the Android Market or the App Store, but imagine the outrage if this had happened in those places. It's not enough that we are so small, let's make things even more difficult. Imagine someone coming in right now, wanting to develop something for the N900. Not really possible to test in on the device (if you have an up-to-date SDK installed), not really possible to deliver to users (if you want the official channel, not building your own repository). It's just sad.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

The issue is discussed, the posts referenced above are actually a result of the preceding council analysis. As for the SDK delay, Nokians themselves on the dev list said the delay is/was essentially bigger then originally intented, but of course with the no release date policy it sadly always includes a certain amount of guesswork. I don't really see a good solution for the simultaneous support of different versions, the choice seems to be that of determining the lesser evil among the various possible scenarios. The simplest would probably be the introduction of an extras-experimental which would have no connection to the other extras repositories and then when the SDK is released, experimental becomes extras-devel...

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

I agree. very frustrating but i cant see how this can be resolved pre 1.2 release effectively. We can only hope that 1.2 is just round the corner.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

hi all.
can anyone say when pr1.2 releases cos tobe very frank this phone sucks to the core.. may be pr1.2 might bring in some change.:(

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Hmm, maybe only people with garage accounts should be allowed to write in development... :D

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Hmm, but how do you prevent Trolls from opening Garage accounts ?... :-)

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Yes indeed the issue has discussed , Some and including myself had given suggestions in a mailing list that has been opened, but it doesnt seem to gather much heat there as I could see , maybe there are more important things.:confused:

I only wish that we should have some workable solution before PR1.3 hits us. This isnt rocket science since it happens with any other platform SDK releases :) , we can/should find some sort of a feasible solution

.... and for now( keeping in mind no solution has been finalised, and guesses for PR1.2 from Nokia has failed ) rollback the autobuilder to PR1.1 if thats what the majority needs

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

this mess is not acceptable. have nearly half a dozen apps now that dont install at all or you have to force them to... stupid.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

so just how influential was this council thing again? seems to me Nokia do as they please when they please!!

all these groups/council reps etc dont actually mean jack when it comes down to the wire....just my opinion though so dont flame me for being an individual :p

This situation is what is making me jump to android, and leaking nokia products for good. their support is very poor..but give the community its due-support here is good!

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

My understanding is that the auto-builder update is absolutely nothing to do with Nokia. The process for updating the repo-builder was discussed by the council (and developers) some time ago, and this process was carried out when the new SDK was released. Unfortunately there were some unforeseen issues, so this process will have to be re-evaluated sometime before the next SDK release.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Thanks for the effort debmasters and everybody involved in it !
Squeeze devkit to be installed to autobuilder

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

latest actions caused new versions (found in HAM) for lots of applications but as far as I can see non of the updates installs fine.
All these 'new' ones say 'Update file corrupted'.

But I guess you knew this already. Just wanted to mention it here, as I didn't see any forum message on it yet.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Sorry for being slow, but does this mean that we won't see any new apps until the 1.2 update?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

What would Jesus do?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Wait on a cross for the update.. duh.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

But then wouldn't he have to wait for Hell to unfreeze?

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

just hang around for it

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Hell isn't frozen all of the time. The rest of the time its just laggy.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

That's funny.

I hate doing this, but I feel I have no choice.

• Jesus is waiting on cross for update
• Update doesn't come till Hell freezes over
• Hell freezes over as update is released
• Jesus dies
• Before ascending to Heaven, sources say Jesus visits Hell
• But Hell is frozen over, Jesus can't get in
• Jesus waits and waits
• Nokia unfreezes Hell
• Jesus parties with Satan and Saddam
• Jesus ascends, but is still way hungover
• A few days pass; they seem like millennia
• Jesus is bored
• Jesus asks dad if he can be in charge of PR1.3
• PR1.3 is released, but Hell is once again frozen over
• Satan has updated his SDK but can't release; vows plagues on House of Nokia
• Nokia shrugs as council tries to figure out Ubuntu's tightly guarded release secrets.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

I was waiting for Cartman to appear but... Kenny died.

Re: PR1.2 & the Autobuilder
 

Yeah, we didn't think Cartman having an n900 was believable, so we had to cut those scenes. He had a Zune, but he lost it. Kenny does make a small appearance during the descension, but you have to be looking for him. It was tough, because he just blends in too much with the flames.