my company deployed a conan package at their artifactory server. There are several versions of this package available for different configurations. Let's say there are two versions, one for Ubuntu and one for Debian. The urls of these versions are looking like this:
https://artifactory.<my-company>/artifactory/<the-project-depending-on-the-conan-package>/_/<name-of-the-package>/<version-number-of-the-package>/_/0/package/<THE-HASH-FOR-UBUNTU-VERSION>/0/conan_package.tgz
https://artifactory.<my-company>/artifactory/<the-project-depending-on-the-conan-package>/_/<name-of-the-package>/<version-number-of-the-package>/_/0/package/<THE-HASH-FOR-DEBIAN-VERSION>/0/conan_package.tgz
When we build a project, which depends on this package, we need to download the fitting version of it (Ubuntu or Debian). Unfortunately, these downloads need to happen during the build (we use cmake).
Now my question: As you can see, the urls contain the hash of the package versions. But when I build the project, how do I now which hash is for the Ubuntu or the Debian version? Obviously I need to distinguish between the two hashes to download the fitting package-version.
Note: Please assume that my conan-cache is empty.
I hope you guys can help my and please correct my if I there are any missunderstandings (I am new to cmake, conan and artifactory).
Related
For a particular script, I need to download the package mono-4.6.1.5 for Ubuntu 20.04 LTS.
However, I can not do it from the official mono web site.
Anyone knows where I could get the .tar.gz package since the one I have is corrupted?
Thank you in advance.
Best regards.
It is always recommended to run latest maintained and compatible version of packages complying with the operating system, excluding specific cases such as experimental purposes and etc.
But if you still need this specified version, you can find the "tar.bz2" format file on this page. There are certain ways to install a tar.bz2 file on Ubuntu, but if you need the tar.gz file, you can convert it by a similar way explained here.
P.S: I'm aware that this package is from a Fedora repo, but I have successfully tried and installed Fedora packages on my Ubuntu 18.04 before. I assume this might also work for you.
Ho, btw, I found another link in my archives: mono project
As I understand, the engines object is only for cases where someone installs my application. I would like to have something similar where I can prevent compiling errors on employee systems (because of wrong node versions etc.) before they happen.
I found that there are two packages:
https://github.com/jgillich/npm-check-engines/blob/master/index.js
https://github.com/kruppel/check-engines
But they are not working or not doing what I want.
It would be nice to have a script running before npm install that checks these engines versions and if they are available in path.
I created a package that does this.
https://github.com/muuvmuuv/npm-supervisor
It can be run via npm before installation and will check if a version in engines satisfies the global or local installed version.
I don't know how it got this bad. I'm a web developer, and I use Ubuntu, and here are just some of the package managers I'm using.
apt-get for system-wide packages
npm for node packages
pip for python packages
pip3 for python 3 packages
cabal for haskell packages
composer for php packages
bower for front-end packages
gem for ruby packages
git for other things
When I start a new project on a new VM, I have to install seemingly a dozen package managers from a dozen different places, and use them all to create a development environment. This is just getting out of control.
I've discovered that I can basically avoid installing and using pip/pip3 just by installing python packages from apt, like sudo apt-get install python3-some-library. This saves from having to use one package manager. That's awesome. But then I'm stuck with the Ubuntu versions of those packages, which are often really old.
What I'm wondering is, is there a meta-package manager that can help me to replace a few of these parts, so my dev environment is not so tricky to replicate?
I had a thought to make a package manager to rule them all for that very reason. Never finished it though, too much effort required to stay compatible. For each package manager you have a huge community supporting it's upkeep.
Best advice I have is to try to reduce your toolchain for each type of project. Ideally you shouldn't need to work in every language you know for each project you work on. How many projects are you using that use both python 2 and python 3 simultaneously?
Keep using apt for your system packages and install git with it. From there try to stick to one language per project. AFAIK all of the package managers you listed support installing packages from git. The languages you mentioned all have comparable sets of tooling, so use the toolchain available for the target language.
I worked with a team that was using composer, npm, bower, bundler, maven, and a tar.gz file for frontend SPAs because those are the tools they knew. On top of all of that, they were using vagrant simply as a deployer. We considered our toolchain and described our need and realized that it could be expressed in a single language once we adopted appropriate tooling for the task at hand.
I'm trying to build an embedded simple web browser for an embedded device and I've decided to use WebKit / WebKitGTK+. However, our device uses a Linux environment somewhat based on CentOS 5.8. I haven't been able to find any RPMS or mention of support for WebKit / WebKitGTK+ for CentOS 5.8 while doing several web searches.
Does anybody know if it's possible to build an older version of WebKitGTK+ such as 1.2.6-2.el6_0 which works well on CentOS 6.3? Are any RPMS available for CentOS 5.8?
The goal here is to be able to run a relatively current, at least 1.2.6 version of WebKitGTk on CentOS 5.8
Note: I was able to sort everything out. Just took a long time compiling all of the dependencies in the correct order with the correct options. I was able to get WebKitGTK 1.6.0 running on Centos 5.8.
You shouldn't have any problems building an old version of webkit if you can install the older versions of libraries that it requires.
If you have older or newer versions of GTK+ etc installed than the old version of webkit requires it may need quite a bit of porting to compile.
I'm not aware of any RPMs that meet your requirements
Depending on the compilation options you should be able to compile the dependencies in an isolated directory. With each library you typically use the --prefix option to specify the destination. Then when compiling something that depends on that library, you typically have an option to specify where to look for that library - something like --with-libraryname=/path/to/library. You want to check ./configure --help of each thing you're compiling to get the correct options.
It'll be quite a bit of work, but you should be able to compile everything you need into an isolated directory without replacing anything on the system. I would highly recommend you avoid doing this in root to ensure you have the right options.
First, I obviously tried to get a binary release of Mono.Fuse project, but the only available downloads were the source files. (And actually it seems that latest release has a syntax error in an override)
So I tried to install it on a Linux box from git, successfully, but I'll soon need to bring it to a production server together with my Xcopy-deployable application.
I don't like compiling software on a production machine, especially because I need to install loooooooooooots of development tools from YaST. So now I have this git-cloned directory with all source and compiled files.
How can I create an RPM package that I can install on multiple production machines with a simple command without resolving configure.sh's dependencies with lots of unneeded libraries like glib-2.0-devel?
Take a look at Open Build Service.