packaging March 2009

packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org

36 participants
26 discussions

RPM variation
by Vadym Chepkov 24 Mar '09

24 Mar '09

Hi, A typical rpm spec file has just one %build section and subpackages contain sub-set of the build tree. I want to create 3 different rpms with different names which follow "subpackage" schema, but, they will contain the full set of build files. I will explain why I need this. IBM MQ Series provides very strange API. The function MQCONN, for example, will behave differently if you link your application either with -lmqm or with -lmqic (you have to choose one). The fist one is so called "server" version, second is "client" version and it depends on what MQ Series you use (client or server edition). In order to accommodate to this requirement, make files for my application have this logic: ifndef WITHOUTMQ MQDEFS = -DMQSERIES ifdef WITHMQCLIENT MQLIBS = -lmqic else MQLIBS = -lmqm endif endif So I can create complete set of binaries for each case: no MQ at all, server or client installation. I want to pack results in 3 different rpms: app.rpm, app-MQServer.rpm and app-MQClient.rpm. rpm -ql for each package will list the same file names. How can I accomplish this in one spec file? Thank you. Sincerely yours, Vadym Chepkov

2 1

Compat packages
by Richard W.M. Jones 24 Mar '09

24 Mar '09

Is there any policy at all on compat packages? I can't find anything except this oblique reference to "openssl" vs "openssl096b": https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Multiple_packages… There are a number of compat-* packages in Fedora. We would like to add one for celt (an audio codec), since the bitstream changes incompatibly in each release, and interoperability depends on an application always using the same specific version. (This is in relation to this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485245 and the celt package in both Rawhide and RHEL 5) Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW http://www.annexia.org/fedora_mingw

4 5

Output from %post scriptlets
by Todd Zullinger 22 Mar '09

22 Mar '09

Are there guidelines on output from %post scriptlets? Specifically, if a scriptlet calls service whatever condrestart, is it required to send output to /dev/null? Most packages seem to do so, and the scriptlet snippets for init scripts suggest this. But some packages don't and the "stopping ... [OK]; starting ... [OK]' output is then displayed when updating. (I'm not suggesting that there should be a guideline on this, just checking if there is one that I've overlooked. :) -- Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have. -- Harry Emerson Fosdick

2 1

WordPress plugins
by Ian Weller 21 Mar '09

21 Mar '09

Hi, please read and discuss: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ianweller/WordPress_plugin_packaging_gu… This packaging guideline draft is for packaging WordPress plugins in a way that will work with both wordpress and wordpress-mu without requiring both to be installed. -- Ian Weller <ianweller(a)gmail.com> GnuPG fingerprint: E51E 0517 7A92 70A2 4226 B050 87ED 7C97 EFA8 4A36

1 0

Typo in GConf ScriptletSnippet
by Todd Zullinger 19 Mar '09

19 Mar '09

I think there's a typo at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#GConf This chunk: %post export GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=<code>gconftool-2 --get-default-source</code> gconftool-2 --makefile-install-rule \ %{_sysconfdir}/gconf/schemas/[NAME] .schemas > /dev/null ||| : has an extra | at the end. It should end with '|| :' AFAIK. -- Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

2 1

Checking distro release from spec file
by Ray Van Dolson 17 Mar '09

17 Mar '09

I'm trying to write a "distro agnostic" spec file that will apply two patches: - Patch 1 if and only if we're building for EL5 or EL4 - Patch 2 if and only if we're building for EL4 I know I can check for EL with the presence of the %{fedora} macro, but is there a "right" way to check the EL version short of calling rpm -q redhat-release? I don't see a macro defined for this in /etc/rpm. I guess I could operate on the dist tag... Ray

4 8

Meeting time
by Jason L Tibbitts III 17 Mar '09

17 Mar '09

So, what time is the next FPC meeting (tomorrow)? Are we moving for American DST (which moves the time in Europe by an hour for, I believe, this one meeting), moving for European summer time, or not moving at all? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Committee just says that we use 17:00UTC and includes no rules about DST or summer time. Personally, I have no preference and no conflicts either way. - J<

3 2

Executable example scripts in docs
by Richard W.M. Jones 13 Mar '09

13 Mar '09

I raised this on fedora-devel-list here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-March/thread.html#00… in relationship to this review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487527 My opinion is that executable example scripts are fine and that rpmlint is wrong to warn about them. Probably we should have some guidelines in this area because currently the situation is a bit confused. What do Fedora packager folk think? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top

5 9

Re: [Distutils] SOLVED: bdist_rpm and pre-release python packages / eggs (was: pre-release versioning problems with sdist, bdist_rpm, bdist_debian)
by Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams 12 Mar '09

12 Mar '09

On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 21:52 -0400, Gerry Reno wrote: > Manuel, > Additionally, from a Python Distutils perspective, Distutils should > not be enforcing one distro's policy. There are RPM-based distro's that > DO NOT follow fedora's packaging policy. Actually, Fedora people have been approached by other distros because they want to adopt most or all of the policies due to its comprehensiveness. But you didn't hear this from me. -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet(a)gmail.com>

1 0

bad file in look-aside repository
by John Dennis 11 Mar '09

11 Mar '09

I need to correct a problem and I'm not sure the best way to handle it. Unbeknownst to me upstream released a bad tar file. I uploaded it to the look-aside repository via "make new-sources FILES=XXX". Upstream has replaced the tar file with a new one and in the process removed a higher version tar file I also uploaded (Arghh...) I need to do the following two things, replace one file with another, remove one file (because this file will at some point, e.g. next version, will need to be in the repository, but just not now). FWIW no build has been performed yet, thus by replacing and/or removing these file it cannot lead to a non-repeatable build. It seems as though "make new-sources" allows one to replace a file. Is this true? If so I'm a bit surprised because it could permit malicious behaviour and lead to non-repeatable builds. Is there a mechanism to remove a file uploaded by mistake? How can I avoid this problem in the future? I normally do a "make local" when a new release comes from upstream and iterate locally until the spec file and patch set is correct before doing a cvs commit, make tag, make build. In the past this has always seemed safe and assured I didn't get anything into our master until it was ready. However, "make local" requires the tar file already be in the look-aside repository and you may not know the tar file is hosed. I believe the same problem applies to scratch builds. So, is there a way to test new builds locally without having to have uploaded the sources first? (I know I can manually craft an rpmbuild command line to emulate what "make local" would do, but it would be better if one could ask the tools to do the equivalent of "make local" without involving the look-aside. -- John Dennis <jdennis(a)redhat.com> Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/

3 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

packaging March 2009