packaging December 2008

packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org

21 participants
17 discussions

Group tag for Java libraries and their documentation
by Mary Ellen Foster 10 Dec '08

10 Dec '08

Going by the options proposed by rpmlint, the only possible tag for any development library -- whatever language it's written in -- is "Development/Libraries". At the same time, there are lots of packages using "Development/Libraries/Java"; on my computer, rpm -q -g Development/Libraries/Java | wc -l yields 46 of them. I also have the same question about "Documentation" vs. "Development/Documentation" for javadoc packages -- rpmlint only accepts the former, but a nontrivial number of packages use the latter. So what's the official verdict on this? Thanks, MEF -- Mary Ellen Foster -- http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/mef/ Informatik 6: Robotics and Embedded Systems, Technische Universität München and ICCS, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh

4 4

adding INSTALL="install -p" to %configure
by Till Maas 09 Dec '08

09 Dec '08

Hi, the current Guidelines recommend to preserve timestamps when adding commands that copy files to a spec file: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps Currently this is often in reviews also checked for commands that are e.g. in upstreams Makefile. If you think that this should be done, can you please adjust the Guidelines to reflect this and add "INSTALL='install -p'" to %configure, to make this automatically happen for packages using autotools? Regards, Till

1 0

MinGW subpackages of OCaml packages
by Richard W.M. Jones 09 Dec '08

09 Dec '08

So as I mentioned before we have an OCaml Windows cross-compiler as part of the Fedora MinGW project: http://hg.et.redhat.com/misc/fedora-mingw--devel/ (click 'manifest' then 'ocaml' or the 'ocaml-*' subdirectories) mingw32-ocaml - the cross-compiler (native Fedora prog) mingw32-ocaml-calendar - cross-compiled OCaml Calendar library mingw32-ocaml-csv - cross-compiled OCaml CSV library mingw32-ocaml-curses - cross-compiled OCaml curses bindings mingw32-ocaml-extlib - cross-compiled OCaml extlib (library) mingw32-ocaml-findlib - (this just has a single config file) mingw32-ocaml-lablgl - cross-compiled OCaml OpenGL bindings mingw32-ocaml-lablgtk - cross-compiled OCaml Gtk bindings mingw32-ocaml-libvirt - cross-compiled OCaml libvirt bindings mingw32-ocaml-xml-light - cross-compiled OCaml XML library When we were doing the original packaging, we explored the option of building the MinGW packages as subpackages of the native Fedora packages, eg: the gnutls specfile would contain the '-n mingw32-gnutls' subpackage. This would have made it simpler to keep the packages in synch with native Fedora, but we felt that native packagers wouldn't be so happy about this. They wouldn't be expert in MinGW packaging, and would drop the MinGW subpackage at the first sign of trouble. However, since I'm in the unique position of maintaining most of the corresponding ocaml-* (native) and mingw32-ocaml-* (cross-compiled) packages, I would like to ask whether I can create the packages above and others in future as subpackages of the already approved ocaml-* native packages. I'm not looking for any exception to the relevant packaging guidelines, which I would try to follow (excepting any mistakes). If you want to see what some RPMs look like, see: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/mingw/fedora-10/x86_64/RPMS/ Thoughts? I set follow-ups to the fedora-packaging list. Rich.

4 10

Updates to Eclipse Plugin packaging guidelines
by Andrew Overholt 08 Dec '08

08 Dec '08

Hi, I have a few updates to the Eclipse Plugin packaging guidelines. They include some clarifications, typos, and updates for Eclipse 3.4.x. The only bit of real substance is modifying the template to note how we're using the dropins mechanism for plugin installation in 3.4.x and above. I've attached a diff 'cause I don't think I can commit it. Can someone else? Thanks, Andrew

5 6

Task work needed
by Jesse Keating 07 Dec '08

07 Dec '08

Some small busy work needed, somebody to ensure each Review Guideline item in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines has a matching guideline entry in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines (or subpages). Bonus points for creating links in the ReviewGuidelines to the matching rule in the Guidelines. Case in point; Can anybody tell me where the guideline exists for: - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. ? (this is suddenly a lot more relevant as rpm picks up pkg-config deps automatically and is dragging in quite a lot of -devel packages on otherwise non-devel installs due to .pc file placement) -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating

1 0

Error when building: gimptool-2.0: Permission denied
by Fabian Deutsch 07 Dec '08

07 Dec '08

Hey, I'm new to packaging packages and tried to build a new package for some gimp plugin. I can build the package local, but building it via koji fails with the following error: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=985724&name=build.log Can some give me a hint what it migth be? Greetings fabian

1 1

Problems with the .info file
by Fabian Affolter 06 Dec '08

06 Dec '08

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, As I mentioned in the subject of this message, I have a problem with the .info file in a package. I'm able to build the package locally but mock fails. I guess that I missed something... Spec file (only the relevant parts): ... Requires(post): /sbin/install-info Requires(preun): /sbin/install-info ... %post /sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/%{name}.info %{_infodir}/dir || : ... %preun if [ "$1" = 0 ]; then /sbin/install-info --delete %{_infodir}/%{name}.info %{_infodir}/dir || : fi ... %files -f %{name}.lang %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING NEWS README TODO %{_infodir}/%{name}.info.gz ... mock complains about installed but not packaged file '/usr/share/info/dir' . Did I miss a directory? Can please anybody give me a hint? Thanks in advance. Kind regards, Fabian SRPM: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/wol-0.7.1-1.fc9.src.rpm SPEC: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/wol.spec - -- Fingerprint: 2F6C 930F D3C4 7E38 6AFA 4EB4 E23C D2DD 36A4 397F Fedora always leads and never follows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkk6yAMACgkQ4jzS3TakOX9pmQCfTOFxTL4XFBuGq4+par9+lJ41 NYQAn1/D9Ct29WNWLxFOz39hZhO19plX =J7BS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

packaging December 2008