[build2] build2 binary packages

Boris Kolpackov boris at codesynthesis.com
Fri Dec 14 13:58:14 UTC 2018

Alex Syrnikov <san at masterspline.eu> writes:

> Personally for me build2 is package (dependency) manager at first. It
> also build system, but this is less important.

I can see how this can be the initial impression based on simple
projects (where one doesn't necessarily "see" the build system

> C++ people are know what is conan and vcpkg, so I mentioned those projects.
> But as You wish (fixed build2 description almost literally but saved
> conan and vcpkg mentioning).

Yes, it's perfect now. The nuance I was trying to convey is that while
build2 serves the same purpose as conan/vcpkg/etc, the philosophy and
the experience is (hopefully) vastly different.

> I still want at least "unofficial deb/rpm packages repository" status
> and link somewhere from build2.org (FAQ, installation page, anythin
> googlabe). In my defense I created rpm and deb packages, Installation
> HowTo, HTTPS Repository. This do not looks like shallow way.

It was never my intention to suggest that the work you have done is
somehow shallow. I actually think it's very well done, I am grateful
for your effort, and I hope you will continue packaging upcoming
release ;-).

The only reason I was reluctant to suggest this as an alternative
installation method is because we cannot expect you to continue
packaging new releases, provide support, etc., indefinitely. In
other words, if at some point you loose interest, become to busy,
etc., we can't complain since this is a purely voluntary effort.

In any case, I went ahead and added the link to the Install page,
the Other Installation Methods section:


Let me know if you see any issues with the wording.

BTW, you may also want to mention CentOS/RedHat 6 since you now
have those packages. I see it's missing here:


> Official Debian packages for build2 not an easy solution (I thought
> about this). Because build includes except libbutil, libbpkg also
> libpkgconf, libsqlite3, libodb and all this packages MUST (as I know)
> be in debian system. [...] So inclusion build2-toolchain in official
> repository require some build2 stabilization, some time and some
> more work.

Yes, I agree it's not exactly trivial and maybe you are right,
perhaps we need to wait until build2 matures a bit more. At the
same time, I think you would be the right person to attempt this
plus it will solve the "continuity" problem I mentioned above
(it's a lot more likely someone else will take over maintenance
of an official Debian package).

Again, thanks for all your work and I hop you will carry on!

More information about the users mailing list