Debian packages of Wine

[Ben Klein]

Hi Maurilio,

I see you've taken over building Lenny packages of Wine. Good work; at
least now there are *some* updated packages available.

I talked to Scott a while ago about taking over from him for all
Debian package building. I have an automated build environment that
builds packages for all variations from etch/i386 to sid/amd64 (even
the very annoying-to-bulid-Wine-for etch/amd64). The one thing that
was stopping me from fully taking over from Scott was I don't have the
resources to host the packages.

So I'm wondering the following:
1) Do you think it's worth supporting Etch? (I argue yes, because it's
still stable)
2) Are you interested in hosting my Etch and Sid packages?
3) I'm clueless as to how to correctly set up a repository, so all I
have at the moment are the raw packages. Would you or Scott be able to
help out with this?

Thanks,
Ben

[Scott Ritchie]

Ben Klein wrote:
> Hi Maurilio,
>
> I see you've taken over building Lenny packages of Wine. Good work; at
> least now there are *some* updated packages available.
>
> I talked to Scott a while ago about taking over from him for all
> Debian package building. I have an automated build environment that
> builds packages for all variations from etch/i386 to sid/amd64 (even
> the very annoying-to-bulid-Wine-for etch/amd64). The one thing that
> was stopping me from fully taking over from Scott was I don't have the
> resources to host the packages.
>
> So I'm wondering the following:
> - Do you think it's worth supporting Etch? (I argue yes, because it's
>
> still stable)

I gave up on Etch because of a few reasons. Etch was missing some
important libraries so bits of Wine would be nonfunctional on amd64, and
when users reported bugs on them because of debian brokenness it was an
added headache.  Moreover, even at its peak the number of etch users was
only about 1% of the Ubuntu total.
> - Are you interested in hosting my Etch and Sid packages?

It's possible I guess, though it would be easier if you had your own
server so you wouldn't have to wait on me for uploads.
> - I'm clueless as to how to correctly set up a repository, so all I
>
> have at the moment are the raw packages. Would you or Scott be able to
> help out with this?

The repository software I use is reprepro, however there are others that
may be easier to set up.
> Thanks,
> Ben

[Ben Klein]

2009/1/18 Scott Ritchie :
> Ben Klein wrote:
> > Hi Maurilio,
> >
> > I see you've taken over building Lenny packages of Wine. Good work; at
> > least now there are *some* updated packages available.
> >
> > I talked to Scott a while ago about taking over from him for all
> > Debian package building. I have an automated build environment that
> > builds packages for all variations from etch/i386 to sid/amd64 (even
> > the very annoying-to-bulid-Wine-for etch/amd64). The one thing that
> > was stopping me from fully taking over from Scott was I don't have the
> > resources to host the packages.
> >
> > So I'm wondering the following:
> > - Do you think it's worth supporting Etch? (I argue yes, because it's
> >
> > still stable)
>
> I gave up on Etch because of a few reasons. Etch was missing some
> important libraries so bits of Wine would be nonfunctional on amd64, and
> when users reported bugs on them because of debian brokenness it was an
> added headache.  Moreover, even at its peak the number of etch users was
> only about 1% of the Ubuntu total.

I know, it's a bitch. Biggest problem with supporting Etch/amd64 will
be making sure the users install the dependencies properly. I could
possibly do this by setting up a package (or series of packages) with
the required 32bit libs and have them appear in the repository.
> > - Are you interested in hosting my Etch and Sid packages?
>
> It's possible I guess, though it would be easier if you had your own
> server so you wouldn't have to wait on me for uploads.

Maurilio has offered to host my packages, which is probably neater
than having a mixture of Etch, Sid and Ubuntu packages on
budgetdedicated, and Lenny packages in his repository :)
> > - I'm clueless as to how to correctly set up a repository, so all I
> >
> > have at the moment are the raw packages. Would you or Scott be able to
> > help out with this?
>
> The repository software I use is reprepro, however there are others that
> may be easier to set up.

Maurilio and I have been discussing his repository. The only thing
it's missing is a GPG key to stop the message about unauthorised
packages.
> > Thanks,
> > Ben

I've also been playing around with -Zlzma. I can only get my packages
down to about 11MB, even with dev headers removed. Is there anything
else you can think of that you've done differently or specially?

[Scott Ritchie]

Ben Klein wrote:
> I've also been playing around with -Zlzma. I can only get my packages
> down to about 11MB, even with dev headers removed. Is there anything
> else you can think of that you've done differently or specially?

Nope.  You can look at the source package if you like, it's possible
something is being deleted or not built (wine test?)

-Scott Ritchie

[Ben Klein]

Well, I've got wine/wine-dev/wine-dbg packages building right now :)

wine: ~

[Ben Klein]

Stupid gmail.

2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> Well, I've got wine/wine-dev/wine-dbg packages building right now :)
>
> wine: ~

wine: ~11MB
wine-dev: ~2.5MB
wine-dbg: ~22MB

These are likely to be bigger on etch.

[Ben Klein]

2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> Stupid gmail.
>
> 2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> > Well, I've got wine/wine-dev/wine-dbg packages building right now :)
> >
> > wine: ~
>
> wine: ~11MB
> wine-dev: ~2.5MB
> wine-dbg: ~22MB
>
> These are likely to be bigger on etch.

Wow, OK, not quite. Turns out I wasn't using lzma before. Now I am.
First build of a Sid/amd64 package yields these sizes:

wine: ~6.7M
wine-dev: ~1.7M
wine-dbg: ~12M

That's a bigger improvement than I expected!

[Austin English]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Ben Klein  wrote:
> 2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> > Stupid gmail.
> >
> > 2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> > > Well, I've got wine/wine-dev/wine-dbg packages building right now :)
> > >
> > > wine: ~
> >
> > wine: ~11MB
> > wine-dev: ~2.5MB
> > wine-dbg: ~22MB
> >
> > These are likely to be bigger on etch.
>
> Wow, OK, not quite. Turns out I wasn't using lzma before. Now I am.
> First build of a Sid/amd64 package yields these sizes:
>
> wine: ~6.7M
> wine-dev: ~1.7M
> wine-dbg: ~12M
>
> That's a bigger improvement than I expected!

What's the difference between these? Wine = main executable/libraries
Wine-dev = includes?
Wine-dbg = debugging symbols?

[Ben Klein]

2009/1/22 Austin English :
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Ben Klein  wrote:
> > 2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> > > Stupid gmail.
> > >
> > > 2009/1/22 Ben Klein :
> > > > Well, I've got wine/wine-dev/wine-dbg packages building right now :)
> > > >
> > > > wine: ~
> > >
> > > wine: ~11MB
> > > wine-dev: ~2.5MB
> > > wine-dbg: ~22MB
> > >
> > > These are likely to be bigger on etch.
> >
> > Wow, OK, not quite. Turns out I wasn't using lzma before. Now I am.
> > First build of a Sid/amd64 package yields these sizes:
> >
> > wine: ~6.7M
> > wine-dev: ~1.7M
> > wine-dbg: ~12M
> >
> > That's a bigger improvement than I expected!
>
> What's the difference between these?
> Wine = main executable/libraries

Correct
> Wine-dev = includes?

Everything provided by install-dev. Primarily development headers, but
also winegcc etc it seems. Average users don't need these, so it's
separated to keep the main package size down.
> Wine-dbg = debugging symbols?

Yes. Handy thing about Debian package building is a tool called
dh_strip. By default, this will strip out debugging symbols, but it
can be told to save them to a separate package.

Again, debugging symbols are useful for some, but take up a lot of space.