From owner-soc-status@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 23 11:16:15 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: soc-status@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E6CD76C for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:16:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mbw500@york.ac.uk) Received: from mail-ie0-x234.google.com (mail-ie0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::234]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7580018D6 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f180.google.com with SMTP id f4so21623924iea.25 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 04:16:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=eMtL/BHNFvKiDjldxMred5ebsDD+G31g/DMeWrQyD9A=; b=d/16+uIgkHf8+4Wlc4bQktNtYI06uuXEtIWeWUOoZ0m6kP9+svjh1sWwEarrJ9c8Tz iEOCDbdEWv5CHlbbK22BacNmQ2gtKCALcxljNLmBIIDK9lj35kbryfdFlynXza++bGmU OcE/9gHG+85/n9j+U8/ln99zpuF8ZrLu0t20jwzu3+WFECg275GHHcLybrBv0VH1Ii+/ DawZEdEgTtCepNchzSEUtsRTZ7XN9HjEw3PALTcu/9nURXVQknDW3vWJlU238RWbmui8 zCYT6RX8t3lMd8RU8d47smajl/d9p4gBiXU1X1gunRI1RKk5xi5E23NubpM6A4tEzUtA GKuw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.74.5 with SMTP id u5mr6141400icj.69.1371986172072; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 04:16:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.209.70 with HTTP; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 04:16:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:16:11 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Progress report - week 1 From: Matthew Windsor To: soc-status@FreeBSD.org X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk4jxxsHpW2eMaq5TWgheNsAZ17aU/ruf4xrCMa6ArCenlOvud58tSbiEq4sloAFtKfCUxF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: Justin Edward Muniz , Eitan Adler X-BeenThere: soc-status@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Summer of Code Status Reports and Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:16:15 -0000 Hi, I think I'm going to stick to doing my progress reports on the Sunday, as it makes sense (end of week = end of GSoC week = progress report). This week, my (as of yet unratified) milestone guideline expected the following code to be written: "pk_backend boilerplate, mapping PackageKit package IDs to libpkg names, ideally some way of testing this (which probably entails implementing package description). By the end of week 1 the backend should be compiling and presenting a (very empty) feature set to packagekit, and this will be tested using pkcon." Indeed I now do have a backend that compiles and has a rudimentary implementation of GetDetails (package description), as well as a trivial mapping from PackageIDs to libpkg (name;version;arch;repo fits 1:1 with the package name, version, arch and reponame data). Most of this was done by adapting the dummy backend, and as such my backend is currently actually mostly consisting of dummy code written by Richard Hughes. I have also written an initial mapping from ports directories to package categories. I will probably be bringing this up with mentors/the pkgkit team/Justin? as to how best to map these and if there is a more maintainable way than the current solution of using a large static array in the backend. A major difficulty was encountered with PackageKit 0.8.9, in that pkcon and packagekitd fail to converse properly. After spending most of this week attempting and failing to find out why this is happening, including trying to fix the /proc/net/route problem as previously mentioned to mentors, trying PackageKit git HEAD, and trying to get the PackageKit testbase to work, Justin suggested that we try get a working backend on the current, obsolete (but working) version of PackageKit in ports and then try porting upwards if these issues are resolved. This will involve some code changes as the API as well as the ABI have changed, but should not be too hard. This is what I have done for now. Another major difficulty is that my initial code was accidentally written against pkgng 1.0 as opposed to 1.1. As 1.1 will likely become stable tomorrow, I'll spend the start of next week porting the code to the new codebase. To conclude, progress this week was slightly stunted due to issues with PackageKit but the ball has been set rolling and next week I hope to have implemented GetDetails in a fully functional if not 100% correct implementation with progress made towards the next stage, local package installation. Finishing the wiki page is also a priority. ~ Matt