[PC-BSD Pbi-dev] bacula-bat pbibuild

Kris Moore kris at pcbsd.com
Thu Jul 31 07:26:27 PDT 2008

Silver Salonen wrote:
> On Thursday 31 July 2008 16:54, Kris Moore wrote:
>> Silver Salonen wrote:
>>> OK, thanks. But another question - bacula-bat port is dependent on 
>>> bacula-server port and version updates come directly from there with 
>>> MASTERDIR etc. The latter port was updated on 29th of July to version 
> 2.4.2, 
>>> but bacula-bat wasn't rebuilt after that (because the port didn't change). 
> So 
>>> do I have to manually update the build-key to get it rebuilt every time 
>>> bacula-server's version is updated or can I make it to track 
> bacula-server's 
>>> version somehow?
>> The way it works, the port you specify in pbi.conf:
>> PBIPORT="/usr/ports/sysutils/bacula-bat"
>> Is the one which is monitored for updates, and triggers a rebuild. If 
>> you wanted to, you could change the port to 
>> /usr/ports/sysutils/bacula-server to follow the server updates, then 
>> setup pbi.conf and add OTHERPORTS like this:
>> OTHERPORT="/usr/ports/sysutils/bacula-bat"
>> This will "track" bacula-server port, and rebuild when it is updated. 
>> Take a look at the "pidgin" module to see how I did this in there, it 
>> really is tracking libpurple, not pidgin itself.
>> Also, I noticed that in the Makefile for bacula-bat, there is no version 
>> number indicated. This is why the PBI is showing up as 
>> BaculaBat-PV0.pbi, instead of BaculaBat<version>-PV0.pbi. Makes it 
>> harder to tell which version we are dealing with. It needs some sort of 
>> DISTVERSION=    2.4.2 line or something. If you switch it around like I 
>> showed above though, it'll use the DISTVERSION from bacula-server properly.
> Doesn't this cause both ports to be built? If this redundancy is not a 
> problem, I'll do the switch.

If you switch them like this:


It'll cause it to follow bacula-server, and use its version number. It 
will first build bacula-server, then build bacula-bat, before creating 
the PBI file, which is what you want right? You need both installed?

>>> And what about that PBIDir Status "Unknown"? Does it have to be 
> reconfirmed to 
>>> appear on pbidir.com as an updated release?
>> I've gone ahead and added the file "dirstatus" with "Active" in it, 
>> which just indicates that this is a current PBI available on PBIDir. Is 
>> this a new version which needs to be added to PBIDir as well?
> Sorry, I didn't get it now: "dirstatus" indicates that this is a current PBI 
> available on PBIDir, but it actually isn't, because it needs to be added 
> there manually, so basically you just added the dirstatus too early?
> I thought the updates are added to PBIDir automatically. But if not, will I 
> just have to test the autobuilt PBI and then send an e-mail to pbi-dev that 
> it's OK and may be added to PBIDir (and then set dirstatus to "active")?

The "dirstatus" was originally just intended to show which 'modules' / 
PBIs are currently on PBIDir:


Since bacula-bat is already on there, we set it to "active". That 
doesn't mean that the latest version is available on PBIDIr, but only 
that we are using this module now, and we should be following it to make 
sure we upload the latest versions. That way you can tell apart the 
modules which are still works-in-progress, and those which should be 
producing working PBIs already.

> But yes, currently built PBI works OK and may be added (although there's 
> already a new version in ports to be built).

Do you want me to add it, or would you prefer to switch around the 
pbi.conf first, so that the new one is generated with a 2.4.2 version in it?


Kris Moore
PC-BSD Software

More information about the Pbi-dev mailing list