[build2] build2 0.12.0 released

Matthew Krupcale mkrupcale at matthewkrupcale.com
Mon Nov 25 12:59:15 UTC 2019

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 7:07 AM Boris Kolpackov <boris at codesynthesis.com> wrote:
> I don't think we are there yet. It probably makes sense to wait until
> the 1.0.0 release and we still have some distance to go on that front.

Okay, sounds good. I'll probably just keep it in Fedora for the moment
then since its release period coincides pretty well with build2

> This sounds great, though I must admit I am quite vague on what it
> all means.

Yeah, I'm not really a Flatpak expert either, but several GNOME and
KDE applications are (also) distributed as Flatpaks which are portable
across Linux distributions. They are built against the various Flatpak
runtimes[1], which are stable across branches. Essentially, you could
consider the runtime a Linux distribution of its own. You can see
briefly how it works[2], but it uses something called bubblewrap for
the container setup and OSTree for the distribution.

> "build2 can be used in Flatpak"

In this case, I was proposing adding build2 to the Sdk runtime as an
extension so that it could be used for building other components
inside the Flatpak. This would make it analogous to the Rust toolchain
Sdk runtime extension[3].

> "build2 plugin for [GNOME Builder]"

Support for building projects in GNOME Builder using build2 would be
implemented via a build system plugin[4] for GNOME Builder. This can
work whether or not build2 is in the Flatpak runtime since GNOME
Builder is available as a Flatpak or a normal distribution package,
but it's probably easier to work on GNOME Builder development as a

> The manifest format is already specified[2].

Okay thanks, that looks simple enough. Kind of resembles INI or TOML,
I suppose. The format versioning also leaves the door open for other
formats if necessary or desirable.

> The Buildfile language will take some effort.

Yeah, understandable. What editor do you use when working with them?
Do you have any syntax highlighting?

> We've done that for Testscript[3][4].

Ah, very good, I do remember seeing this at some point.

[1] http://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/available-runtimes.html
[2] http://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/under-the-hood.html
[3] https://gitlab.com/freedesktop-sdk/freedesktop-sdk/blob/master/elements/extensions/rust/rust.bst
[4] https://builder.readthedocs.io/en/latest/plugins/building/buildsystem.html

More information about the users mailing list