-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
%define configure_relative_path ..
and then have %configure use the value of that instead of './' when calling the actual configure script?
Thanks,
- -- Michel
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 13:13:06 -0400, Michel Salim wrote:
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
%define configure_relative_path ..
and then have %configure use the value of that instead of './' when calling the actual configure script?
Try this in your spec (substitute SOMEPATH appropriately):
%global configure %(rpm --eval %%configure|sed -e 's!./configure!SOMEPATH/configure!')
Michel Salim wrote, at 06/23/2008 02:13 AM +9:00:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
%define configure_relative_path ..
and then have %configure use the value of that instead of './' when calling the actual configure script?
Thanks,
xscreensaver uses:
%build archdir=`./config.guess` mkdir $archdir cd $archdir ..... ln -s ../configure . %configure $CONFIG_OPTS rm -f configure
make %{?_smp_mflags}
Regards, Mamoru
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Michel Salim wrote:
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
Thanks to Michael and Mamoru -- should these be listed in our packaging guidelines?
- -- Michel
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 05:43:49PM -0400, Michel Salim wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Thanks to Michael and Mamoru -- should these be listed in our packaging guidelines?
I don't think so, but you can go ahead and add it to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingTricks
-- Pat
Michel Salim wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Michel Salim wrote:
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
Thanks to Michael and Mamoru -- should these be listed in our packaging guidelines?
I'd really rather see something like your initial suggestion.
Hello,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:39:49AM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
Michel Salim wrote:
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
%define configure_relative_path
I'd really rather see something like [this] suggestion.
Agreed. Filed as http://bugzilla.redhat.com/458644
[This is suitable to be submitted upstream, but rpm.org does not have a bug tracker, it features only lists, and I did not care to subscribe before cc'ing this mail, so I guess my chanced to get heared there are low. They read fedora bugzilla, though. ;-) ]
Stepan Kasal
Poppler's spec does this:
%build pushd %{name}-%{version} # despair sed -i s/qt3/qt-3.3/g configure %configure \ --disable-static \ --enable-cairo-output \ --enable-poppler-qt \ --enable-poppler-qt4 \ --enable-xpdf-headers make %{?_smp_mflags} popd
Is this not good enough for some reason?
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Stepan Kasal skasal@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:39:49AM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
Michel Salim wrote:
Hi all,
Some upstream developers recommend that their software (thinking of LLVM and PLT Scheme, but there must be others) *not* be configured and built at the top-level source directory (typically recommending using build/, object/ or some such).
When this is needed, currently the Fedora packager has to revert to calling the configure script directly, foregoing the %configure macro, and copying as much of the configure settings by hand. Would it be a desirable feature to, say, be able to declare
%define configure_relative_path
I'd really rather see something like [this] suggestion.
Agreed. Filed as http://bugzilla.redhat.com/458644
[This is suitable to be submitted upstream, but rpm.org does not have a bug tracker, it features only lists, and I did not care to subscribe before cc'ing this mail, so I guess my chanced to get heared there are low. They read fedora bugzilla, though. ;-) ]
Stepan Kasal
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
-
Mamoru Tasaka -
Michael Schwendt -
Michel Salim -
Patrice Dumas -
Peter Jones -
Stepan Kasal -
Vasile Gaburici