What: I've a shell script that I'd like to distribute to my LUG.
I believe that a debian package will be the easiest way to distribute it. I want to create a .deb file for the script in this repository
Where: I want it to be placed in some directory like /usr/local/bin so that it is easy to execute and maybe create some symbolic links
Problem: How to write make file for it and/or other files and folders required to do that. I researched a lot when I tried to do it couple of months ago but no luck then. Here are the files from my previous attempt Now I'm trying to pack this for a tutorial on shell script in my LUG and facing similar situation again.
I'll be really glad if someone can be patient enough to guide me through it.
Any kind of resources or details will be much appreciated.
PS: I also intend to port the script to perl soon.
As mirabilos said, you should at least have a look to the packaging-tutorial written by Lucas Nussbaum, the current Debian Project Leader. You can install it directly from a Debian repository:
# apt-get install packaging-tutorial
Then, open and skim the PDF located at /usr/share/doc/packaging-tutorial/packaging-tutorial.pdf. After skimming it you'll have the basic knowledge needed to understand the structure of a Debian package.
Now let's get our hands dirty. mv your script to a new directory. The name of the directory must follow the nomenclature upstreamname-*version*.
rul#helicon:/tmp/a$ mkdir script-0.1
rul#helicon:/tmp/a$ mv script.sh script-0.1
cd to the directory where your script is and run dh_make --createorig. Choose single binary. You'll now have a debian/ directory with lots of file in it. This files are the ones you need to make your package. In your case, most, if not all, of the *.ex files are safe to be removed. Read and modify when needed the remaining files.
Now let's write the core of our package. You want to install a script in /usr/local/bin. The good news is that there is already a program that does that for you. You just have to specify the file name and where to put it. This program is dh_install. It has a very complete man page. After reading it, you should now understand that you have to create a install file in the debian/ directory.
rul#helicon:/tmp/a/script-0.1$ echo "script.sh usr/local/bin/" > debian/install
Here you have a real example of this file usage.
That's it! You have all you need to build your package. cd to the root directory of your package and run dpkg-buildpackage. If all went well, you'll have your fresh new .deb in ../.
You really should have a look at, in this order, the inofficial packaging tutorial, the Debian New Maintainers' Guide, Debian Developer's Reference and Policy. (The order is also increasingly dry, and reversed for formalness.)
It may take two days or so, but is really worth it.
Also, look at other small packages shipping only scripts, or other mere “file installers” (like php-htmlpurifier, first example I remembered while writing this).
If your package will only have a single file (or small number of files) in it, going through the full Debian toolchain might be overkill.
For packaging single files, I recommend you use the equivs tool. Install the equivs package, then run equivs-control to create a template file.
Edit the template file (give your package a name, version number etc.).
Add the name of your script to the Files: attribute in the template, for example:
Package: my-awesome-script
Version: 4.2
Files: my-awesome-script.sh /usr/local/bin
Section: misc
Priority: optional
Standards-Version: 3.9.2
Maintainer: Me <me#gmail.com>
Description: An awesome script doing stuff
Lorem ipsum etc. pp.
Put the script file alongside the template file.
Run equivs-build which will create your Debian package.
This is much easier for these simple cases than anything else – and the package that you get is standards compliant without resorting to any hacks or jumping through hoops.
for pre install, write your script in file DEBAIN/preinst;
for post install, write your script in file DEBAIN/postinst;
Use checkinstall or fpm to build your packages in minutes not hours or days!:
sudo checkinstall --fstrans=yes --install=no -D --pkgname=script \
--maintainer='Name <name#domain.tld>' --pkgarch=all --pkgversion=0.1 \
--nodoc cp script.sh /usr/local/bin
fpm -s dir -t deb --prefix /usr/local/bin -n script -v 0.1 -a all ./script.sh
Note: checkinstall requires dpkg/dpkg-deb (only works on Debian/Ubuntu), fpm is platform independent but requires ruby.
Related
This question has been asked many time but I am not able to resolve the problem from them so I am asking
I had installed Cygwin a few days ago.I tried using ./configure command but it says
-bash: ./configure: No such file or directory
I tried using
where configure
but I got the output
INFO: Could not find files for the given pattern(s).
then I tried grep configureand I got this output
/etc/bash_completion.d/configure
/usr/i686-pc-cygwin/sys-root/usr/share/libtool/libltdl/configure
/usr/share/ELFIO/configure
/usr/share/libtool/libltdl/configure
I tried to export the path and then run the ./configure but it also didn't worked.
I find no executable file named as configure in my cygwin bin directory.
Does it mean that I have to add configure file manually?How can I correct it?
NOTE :- I had also tried sh configure but it also didn't worked
If a software project is set up to be built using autoconf, that tool generates a script canonically called configure. It queries the system for various parameters that are subsequently used in the build, and is specific to the software package to be built. Different software projects have different configure scripts. They are all called configure, but their contents are not the same.
So, to actually build such a software project once that script was set up (usually done by the maintainers when packaging the source tarball for distribution), you call:
tar xzf <tarball>.gz # or xjf <tarball>.bz2 or whatever
cd <sourcedir> # the one you just untarred
./configure
make
make install
Note the prefix ./, which means "located in this directory" (i.e. the top directory of that project's source tree).
Actually, the better procedure is the so-called "out-of-tree build", when you set up a different directory for the binaries to be built in, so the source tree remains unmodified:
tar xzf <tarball>.gz # or xjf <tarball>.bz2 or whatever
mkdir builddir
cd builddir
../<sourcedir>/configure
make
make install
So, there is supposed to be no configure executable in your PATH, you are supposed to call the script of that name from the source tree you are trying to build from.
If I correctly understood...
Configure is not an application that should be installed on your system, but script that should be delivered with source code to prepare for make command. File named configure should be in the main directory of source code.
I understand that this is an old question. However many might find this solution helpful.
Normally we use the make command to compile a downloaded source in cygwin. In many cases it contains a autogen.sh file. Running that file with
bash autogen.sh
will in many case solve the problem. At least it solved my issue and i could then use the make command
How can I put my Go binary into a Debian package? Since Go is statically linked, I just have a single executable--I don't need a lot of complicated project metadata information. Is there a simple way to package the executable and resource files without going through the trauma of debuild?
I've looked all over for existing questions; however, all of my research turns up questions/answers about a .deb file containing the golang development environment (i.e., what you would get if you do sudo apt-get install golang-go).
Well. I think the only "trauma" of debuild is that it runs lintian after building the package, and it's lintian who tries to spot problems with your package.
So there are two ways to combat the situation:
Do not use debuild: this tool merely calls dpkg-buildpackage which really does the necessary powerlifting. The usual call to build a binary package is dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b. You still might call debuild for other purposes, like debuild clean for instance.
Add the so-called "lintian override" which can be used to make lintian turn a blind eye to selected problems with your package which, you insist, are not problems.
Both approaches imply that you do not attempt to build your application by the packaging tools but rather treat it as a blob which is just wrapped to a package. This would require slightly abstraining from the normal way debian/rules work (to not attempt to build anything).
Another solution which might be possible (and is really way more Debian-ish) is to try to use gcc-go (plus gold for linking): since it's a GCC front-end, this tool produces a dynamically-linked application (which links against libgo or something like this). I, personally, have no experience with it yet, and would only consider using it if you intend to try to push your package into the Debian proper.
Regarding the general question of packaging Go programs for Debian, you might find the following resources useful:
This thread started on go-nuts by one of Go for Debian packagers.
In particular, the first post in that thread links to this discussion on debian-devel.
The second thread on debian-devel regarding that same problem (it's a logical continuation of the former thread).
Update on 2015-10-15.
(Since this post appears to still be searched and found and studied by people I've decided to update it to better reflec the current state of affairs.)
Since then the situation with packaging Go apps and packages got improved dramatically, and it's possible to build a Debian package using "classic" Go (the so-called gc suite originating from Google) rather than gcc-go.
And there exist a good infrastructure for packages as well.
The key tool to use when debianizing a Go program now is dh-golang described here.
I've just been looking into this myself, and I'm basically there.
Synopsis
By 'borrowing' from the 'package' branch from one of Canonical's existing Go projects, you can build your package with dpkg-buildpackage.
install dependencies and grab a 'package' branch from another repo.
# I think this list of packages is enough. May need dpkg-dev aswell.
sudo apt-get install bzr debhelper build-essential golang-go
bzr branch lp:~niemeyer/cobzr/package mypackage-build
cd mypackage-build
Edit the metadata.
edit debian/control file (name, version, source). You may need to change the golang-stable dependency to golang-go.
The debian/control file is the manifest. Note the 'build dependencies' (Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7.0.50~), golang-stable) and the 3 architectures. Using Ubuntu (without the gophers ppa), I had to change golang-stable to golang-go.
edit debian/rules file (put your package name in place of cobzr).
The debian/rules file is basically a 'make' file, and it shows how the package is built. In this case they are relying heavily on debhelper. Here they set up GOPATH, and invoke 'go install'.
Here's the magic 'go install' line:
cd $(GOPATH)/src && find * -name '*.go' -exec dirname {} \; | xargs -n1 go install
Also update the copyright file, readme, licence, etc.
Put your source inside the src folder. e.g.
git clone https://github.com/yourgithubusername/yourpackagename src/github.com/yourgithubusername/yourpackagename
or e.g.2
cp .../yourpackage/ src/
build the package
# -us -uc skips package signing.
dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc
This should produce a binary .deb file for your architecture, plus the 'source deb' (.tgz) and the source deb description file (.dsc).
More details
So, I realised that Canonical (the Ubuntu people) are using Go, and building .deb packages for some of their Go projects. Ubuntu is based on Debian, so for the most part the same approach should apply to both distributions (dependency names may vary slightly).
You'll find a few Go-based packages in Ubuntu's Launchpad repositories. So far I've found cobzr (git-style branching for bzr) and juju-core (a devops project, being ported from Python).
Both of these projects have both a 'trunk' and a 'package' branch, and you can see the debian/ folder inside the package branch. The 2 most important files here are debian/control and debian/rules - I have linked to 'browse source'.
Finally
Something I haven't covered is cross-compiling your package (to the other 2 architectures of the 3, 386/arm/amd64). Cross-compiling isn't too tricky in go (you need to build the toolchain for each target platform, and then set some ENV vars during 'go build'), and I've been working on a cross-compiler utility myself. Eventually I'll hopefully add .deb support into my utility, but first I need to crystallize this task.
Good luck. If you make any progress then please update my answer or add a comment. Thanks
Building deb or rpm packages from Go Applications is also very easy with fpm.
Grab it from rubygems:
gem install fpm
After building you binary, e.g. foobar, you can package it like this:
fpm -s dir -t deb -n foobar -v 0.0.1 foobar=/usr/bin/
fpm supports all sorts of advanced packaging options.
There is an official Debian policy document describing the packaging procedure for Go: https://go-team.pages.debian.net/packaging.html
For libraries: Use dh-make-golang to create a package skeleton. Name your package with a name derived from import path, with a -dev suffix, e.g. golang-github-lib-pq-dev. Specify the dependencies ont Depends: line. (These are source dependencies for building, not binary dependencies for running, since Go statically links all source.)
Installing the library package will install its source code to /usr/share/golang/src (possibly, the compiled libraries could go into .../pkg). Building depending Go packages will use the artifacts from those system-wide locations.
For executables: Use dh-golang to create the package. Specify dependencies in Build-Depends: line (see above regarding packaging the dependencies).
I recently discovered https://packager.io/ - I'm quite happy with what they're doing. Maybe open up one of the packages to see what they're doing?
I was wondering if the following is possible.
I have a BASH script that I want to make available for some people but I wanted them to only have to "install" the program and not messing around with terminal, so I thought a .deb would be cool.
So what would the "install" do?
Simple. I want to move the script and an icon to a folder (any folder, but I was wondering some hidden folder in Home) and then run a script that creates a launcher in the Applications menu for the first script. It seems there isn't much to it, but for what I've searched, there doesn't seem to be a lot of info...
How can I accomplish this?
By the way, I'm using Ubuntu 11.04.
Basically (install and) run dh-make to set up the debian/ directory, edit the generated files (mainly remove the many you do not need, and fill in a package description and any dependencies in debian/control), then debuild-us -uc -b.
You may also have to set up a simple Makefile for debian/rules to call; it probably only needs an install target to copy the binary to $(DESTDIR)/usr/bin.
Binaries install into /usr/bin and you should not try to override that. The way to have a menu is to add a .desktop file.
Once you have a good .deb you will need to set up a repo for distributing it. The simplest solution is probably to set up a launchpad.net account and create a personal PPA there.
It's not hard to find more information on these topics, but of course, you need to know what to look for. The canonical documentation is the Debian New Maintainer's Guide.
Found this video on youtube that explains IN FULL the process of creating a *.deb for a script or program and even mentions how to do it for a C program.
Full guide in how to build simple *.deb package
Has one bug, btw, that the author, during the making of the *.deb, didn't notice. The path in the *.desktop file for the EXEC parameter is wrong in the example.
I'm trying to install discount on my VPS which is based on Solaris and compiling works great after setting some environment variables but the install fails.
So I thought I'd do the install manually, but what does install really do? Is it simply a mv followed by a chmod? Is it magic? That error seems to show that it attempts to do a lot of searching for files all over?
Can I just copy the binary, library and header files as usual?
Googling "install" doesn't give me much relevant information so I appreciate any clarification I can get!
According to man install:
install [OPTION]... [-T] SOURCE DEST`
install [OPTION]... SOURCE... DIRECTORY
install [OPTION]... -t DIRECTORY SOURCE...
install [OPTION]... -d DIRECTORY...
In the first three forms, copy SOURCE to DEST or multiple SOURCE(s) to
the existing DIRECTORY, while setting permission modes and owner/group.
In the 4th form, create all components of the given DIRECTORY(ies).
As for the difference to using cp, according to install vs. cp; and mmap, install unlinks the existing file, creating a new one linked to the same spot.
This has the advantage that, if the file you're trying to overwrite is a currently running program, it can continue running, as the file being written is in fact in a new location, and the existing program code is still in the old one.
A cp simply tries to overwrite the existing file, which will fail if the file is locked due to being in use.
Further information
install Command
Is there a way to get a list of filenames/paths that make install copies to the filesystem? Some packages come with a MANIFEST file, but not the ones that I am working with.
I was just investigating this myself while compiling a custom version of QEMU. I used the following method to work out what was installed and where (as well as using it as a basis for a .deb file):
mkdir /tmp/installer
./configure --target-list=i386-softmmu
make
sudo make install DESTDIR=/tmp/installer
cd /tmp/installer
tree .
Tree is a utility that recursively displays the contents of a directory in a visually appealing manner - sudo apt-get install tree for Debian / Ubuntu users
Hope that helps someone... it took me a bit of poking around to nut it out, but I found it quite a useful way of visualising what was going on.
The most fool-proof way is to use chroot: have "make install" run inside a chroot jail; compute a list of the files that you had before the installation, and compare that to the list of files after the installation.
Many installations will support either a --prefix configuration option, and/or a DESTDIR environment variable. You can use those for a lighter-wait version of chroot (trusting that the installation will fail if it tries to write to a location outside these if you run installation as a fairly unprivileged user).
Another approach is to replace the install program. Many packages support an INSTALL environment variable that, well, is the install program to use; there are tracing versions of install around.
make uninstall might show the files as it removes them if the author of the compiling instructions provides the information to allow an uninstall (it has been awhile since I have done one so I can't say for sure).
Also make -n install will do a "dry run" of the install process and it may be reasonable to extract the information from its results.
It differs for every project that you run 'make install' on. The files which are installed are controlled by the install target in the Makefile being used. Your best bet is to open the Makefile and search for 'install:' - from there you can see what files will be copied out to your system.
Take a snapshot of the contents of the install location before installing
Install
Compare the current contents with the old contents.
Example:
./configure --prefix /usr/local
make -j`nproc`
find /usr/local | sort -u > /tmp/snapshot1
make install
find /usr/local | sort -u > /tmp/snapshot2
comm -3 /tmp/snapshot{1,2} # this prints the files added by `make install` to stdout
If the install program you're using doesn't support DESTDIR or --prefix (or an equivalent), I have found that it may be possible to identify new files as follows:
Start with as clean a system as possible (a fresh VM image is preferable)
Compile the software, wait a few minutes.
Install the software package.
Find files modified within the past 5 minutes: sudo find / -mmin -5 -type f (the find command has a ton of parameters for querying based on file modification / creation times, but this worked pretty well for me; you just need to narrow the time span so that you pick up the files created by the installer but nothing else).