Packaging

[kaiphat]

Tracking

• Debian
• Mac (homebrew)
• Mac (macports)
• Arch Linux
• Nixpkgs
• Binaries for Linux and macOS (x86 and arm)

[natecraddock]

Just to check, you are requesting packaging support for debian/ubuntu and derivatives? I've never done it before, but I expect adding a PPA shouldn't be too difficult

[kaiphat]

Yes, for ubuntu. Thank you!

[natecraddock]

Okay I'll look into this. I plan to release version 0.3 this week, and one of my goals for that release is to provide binaries in the release which should make it easier for those without a Zig compiler.

[mathjiajia]

If can, please consider homebrew also.
Thanks so much.

[natecraddock]

@mathjiajia homebrew is a great idea! I develop on Arch Linux, but I know a few people who I can test zf on macs with.

Currently to my knowledge zf does not work properly on macs. The interface does not draw properly. I plan to fix this this week, it shouldn't be more than fixing a few syscalls.

I'm going to update this issue to be tracking support for various package managers

[mathjiajia]

@mathjiajia homebrew is a great idea! I develop on Arch Linux, but I know a few people who I can test zf on macs with.

Currently to my knowledge zf does not work properly on macs. The interface does not draw properly. I plan to fix this this week, it shouldn't be more than fixing a few syscalls.

I'm going to update this issue to be tracking support for various package managers

I see. Thank you.
I have tried zf-native.nvim with telescope, and it is great. Matching filename (with higher priority) is what I need exactly.

[natecraddock]

@mathjiajia I have looked a bit into homebrew now. From their docs

We will reject formulae that seem too obscure, partly because they won’t get maintained and partly because we have to draw the line somewhere.

We frown on authors submitting their own work unless it is very popular.

I fear that zf might be a bit too young for homebrew to accept, and it sounds like they would prefer someone other than me make the package.

It seems that I could maintain my own tap. I'm not a user of homebrew, but I could imagine some people would prefer a package in the official core repo.

I do plan to make macos binaries available soon with future releases, but I'm not sure how to go forward with zf and homebrew. (Maybe spread the word to anyone you think might enjoy it? 😄 ) Perhaps someone with more experience with homebrew could give some advice too.

[mathjiajia]

I fear that zf might be a bit too young for homebrew to accept, and it sounds like they would prefer someone other than me make the package.

I think so.

It seems that I could maintain my own tap. I'm not a user of homebrew, but I could imagine some people would prefer a package in the official core repo.

Thanks. Maintaining your tap is a good choice. When zf becoming popular, it will be easy to add into homebrew core.

I do plan to make macos binaries available soon with future releases, but I'm not sure how to go forward with zf and homebrew. (Maybe spread the word to anyone you think might enjoy it? 😄 ) Perhaps someone with more experience with homebrew could give some advice too.

Anyway, thanks so much for your efforts @natecraddock 👏

[hwittenborn]

@natecraddock: I saw that you said you develop on Arch Linux. I'm assuming that you're familiar with the PKGBUILD format, in which case I think makedeb would work great for creating Debian packages (prenote, it's a personal project).

[natecraddock]

@hwittenborn sorry for taking so long to reply! I think makedeb looks wonderful. I'll take a closer look soon, but from what I can tell it just takes PKGBUILD files and outputs a .deb file?

[hwittenborn]

Not a problem @natecraddock :)

it just takes PKGBUILD files and outputs a .deb file?

That's correct, yes.