Re: [Tracker] [PATCH] Running Tracker 0.7 in Fremantle

[Martyn Russell <martyn lanedo com>]

On 20/11/09 18:47, Juan A. Suarez Romero wrote:
> Hi.

Hi,

> I've been working in a patch to be able to run Tracker 0.7 in
> N900/Fremantle.

Nice!

> Attached is the set of patches that make this possible. The good news
> about them is that allow that Tracker 0.7 runs together with default
> tracker (0.6.x). Thus, applications can still use tracker 0.6 and newers
> can use tracker 0.7

Yea, we did spend a lot of time making this possible.

> Most of the changes consisted of some renames to avoid overwritting
> files from tracker 0.6.

Yea, the utils of course ;)

> Thus, for instance, we have now tracker-stats-0.7, keeping tracker-stats
> for default tracker-0.6.
>
> I must say that I only renamed those files that are in conflict with
> tracker 0.6. Thus, tracker-control maintains its name.
>
> Nevertheless, I've been talking with Ivan about this issue, and he
> thinks that it would be a good idea to rename all files, so all command
> line tools end in "-0.7". I think it's a good idea. Moreover, I'd
> suggest to do the same for 0.6.x branch, so all files end in "-0.6".
> Then, one can use alternatives approach, so for instance "tracker-stats"
> can point either to tracker-stats-0.7 or tracker-stats-0.6. In some
> sense, this is the approach followed by gcc, where the executable "gcc"
> is actually a link to "gcc-$VERSION".

Hmm, I have mixed views here. For the most part, I agree with Michael 
Biebl. I see a bunch of options:

1. We rename all commands to work together with 0.6 and 0.7 in their name.

2. We rename JUST the 0.6 commands and use the 0.7 commands with the 
original names (or visa versa)

3. We use option #1 and have symlinks to the 0.6/0.7 version depending 
on which one is used by apps.

4. We just don't bother worrying about it.

I personally am in 2 minds about options #2 and #4. When you consider 
which commands this affects, they are all command line tools which the 
user shouldn't EVER need to worry about (at least on the device). So I 
have no problem letting them be overwritten OR perhaps providing a 
debian post install script to check for pre-existing commands which 
conflict and moving/renaming the old ones.

> My main concerns is how to manage these patches, as they don't fit in
> any branch. Maybe it would be a good idea to create a new branch in
> gitorious called "fremantle-0.7", which would have Tracker 0.7 for
> Fremantle.

Yes, well, this depends on which solution we use. I would rather just 
have some debian/ foo which we add to the harmattan packages to detect 
previous installs and move/rename the old files.

> BTW, I've been testing it in a real device, and it works fine. You can
> use both "tracker-files -s Music" and "tracker-query-0.7 -u", and they
> return same information.

You do know that tracker-search replaces tracker-files right? Also 
tracker-sparql pretty much replaces tracker-query and tracker-files too 
AND does everything that tracker-search now does (tracker-search being a 
convenience for tracker-sparql).

> The drawback is that two trackers will be
> running.

Well, if we have applications that need both versions then we have to do 
that. I think it is a bad idea personally and I would rather see all 
applications move to the new version at the same time than use both 
versions of tracker together. We already have limited resources on the 
device and to add another indexer really won't bode well.

> Finally, these patches (well, really the first one) should help to fix
> GB#601799.

Well, I think Michael said it already, but 0.6 and 0.7 are meant to 
co-exist for developers ONLY not for real use together.

Also, Philip is right too, we need to upgrade SQLite - there was some 
bug as I recall which required us to upgrade.

--
Regards,
Martyn