Hi,
During the review of mkdocs[1], which is a python package for
generating static webpages, I (as reviewer) noticed that it installs a
lot of themes (javascript, fonts and the like) under
/usr/lib/python3/site-packages/mkdocs/themes.
My feeling is that this static architecture independent data should
really be installed under /usr/share/mkdocs to comply with the FHS[2].
But the packager (quite reasonably) points out that other packages
such as sphinx install templates and themes under
/usr/lib/python3/site-packages.
So, the question is: is it acceptable for this package to install arch
independent themes (i.e. non-python code) under
/usr/lib/python3/site-packages ?
TIA,
Jonathan
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1230963
[2] http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#PURPOSE26
Hi all,
Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Files_to_include the
__pycache__ directory needs shipped in python3-* packages. The default
Python template generated by rpmdev-newspec includes %{python3_sitelib}/*
which would include __pycache__, no problem. (same applies for
python3_sitearch)
However, if the package installs *.py files under %{python3_sitearch}
directly (not under a module), the __pycache__ directory ends up being
owned by both that package and python3-libs.
e.g. on my current system:
$ rpm -qf /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/__pycache__
python3-six-1.9.0-1.fc22.noarch
python3-setuptools-17.1.1-3.fc22.noarch
python3-libs-3.4.2-6.fc22.x86_64
Per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_directory_is_also_o…
Fixing this would involve, taking python3-six for example:
before:
%{python3_sitelib}/*
after:
%{python3_sitelib}/*.*
%{python3_sitelib}/__pycache__/*
Putting this in a template might cause problems though, as if the Python
package ships modules, each of the module would have to be listed
separately.
Should we err on the side of simplicity (and end up with potentially
multiple owners of site{lib,arch}/__pycache__ ? I am reviewing two packages
where this takes place:
python-line_profiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1241919
python-scandir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1245845
Thanks,
--
Michel Alexandre Salim
Hi,
Let me see if I understand , on 2015-05-20 [1] FESCo has decided to
merge some of the policy around service units, socket units and timer
units into a single policy that treats all units that run as default the
same way.
Note: decision made 6 days before Fedora 22 Final Release.
We got some new wiki pages [2] - How to enable a service by default ?
Services are enabled or disabled by default through systemd preset files
But before that I used a script to enable services like this:
%post guest
/bin/systemctl daemon-reload >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
/bin/systemctl restart systemd-modules-load.service >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
/bin/systemctl enable vboxservice.service >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
/bin/systemctl restart vboxservice.service >/dev/null 2>&1 || :
This kind of scriptlet still works on Fedora 22 (updated), on a new
installation ?
Other wiki page shows that PackagePresets are from Fedora 18 ! [3]
And what is the best way to set a preset for a service ? that we want
enable by default, when is installed .
Note: I'm asking this because I don't saw any example on package
guidelines.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/532
[2]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DefaultServices#Locally_running_se…
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PackagePresets
Thanks,
--
Sérgio M. B.
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2015-07-23 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2015-07-23 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT
2015-07-23 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT
2015-07-23 16:00 Thu UTC <-
2015-07-23 17:00 Thu Europe/London BST
2015-07-23 18:00 Thu Europe/Paris CEST
2015-07-23 18:00 Thu Europe/Berlin CEST
2015-07-23 21:30 Thu Asia/Calcutta IST
------------------new day----------------------
2015-07-24 00:00 Fri Asia/Singapore SGT
2015-07-24 00:00 Fri Asia/Hong_Kong HKT
2015-07-24 01:00 Fri Asia/Tokyo JST
2015-07-24 02:00 Fri Australia/Brisbane EST
Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13
= Followups =
#topic #506 Guideline Draft: Service First-Time Setup
.fpc 506
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/506
#topic #508 New GID for openstack-neutron
.fpc 508
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/508
= New business =
#topic #551 remove duplicated text about starting services by default
.fpc 551
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/551
#topic #552 update python packaging guidelines
.fpc 552
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/552
= Open Floor =
For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The
report of the agenda items can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13
If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fpc,
e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until
the following meeting.
I ran across this while doing a fedora-review:
Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
/usr/lib/gap/pkg/aclib/gap(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No),
/usr/lib/gap/pkg/aclib/htm(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No),
/usr/lib/gap/pkg/aclib/doc(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No),
/usr/lib/gap/pkg/aclib(languages, langpacks:, enabled, are, No)
It apparently can be resolved by upgrading to dnf-langpacks-0.12.0-2
More detail can be found here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244531
Just wanted folks to be aware that the recent dnf changes are affecting the
packaging tools.
I would like to submit a new package that provides a Pre-Boot
Authorization (PBA) image. The PBA is a "bootloader" of sorts that
prompts the user for the passphrase to unlock a Self-Encrypting Drive
(SED) using the TCG OPAL command set, and then either chainloads to
the real OS or reboots to allow the BIOS to boot the real OS. The
image gets installed to the OPAL SED as a sort of "shadow MBR/shadow
disk image" using a special command "msed" (Manage Self-Encrypting
Drive) that I also plan to submit a package for.
In my case, I've developed a tiny embedded Linux-based PBA image [1]
using Buildroot [2] and the MSED software [3]. The final image is a
MBR-partitioned disk image with VFAT filesystem containing the
specially built Linux kernel (vmlinuz), initramfs (rootfs.gz), and the
installed syslinux bootloader.
Before you ask, I can't use even a stripped-down Fedora image for this
purpose, because it must be TINY and it only exists to run a single
command (linuxpba), then reboot. My image is 4MB and could be made
even smaller. See the reasoning in [1] for why it must be so small.
[1] https://github.com/cranderson/buildroot-linuxpba
[2] http://buildroot.uclibc.org/
[3] http://www.r0m30.com/msed
Now I know there are several challenges to using the Buildroot
approach to building software for Fedora. Buildroot downloads
software from the Internet, unpacks, patches, configures, and builds
it. The build environment is built first, so gcc, uClibc, busybox,
etc. and then the packages you want to include are built in that
environment.
What is the best approach I should use that is acceptable to Fedora?
Would it be acceptable to bundle source packages, Buildroot itself,
and my Buildroot configuration into one SRPM so everything is
self-contained and can be built without requiring network
connectivity? This means I would have to bundle the source code for
gcc, the linux kernel, uClibc, busybox, etc.
Or is there some way to pull in SRPM packages that already exist in
Fedora, and use those as part of my build process so that I don't have
to bundle all the source code? Additionally, I could made separate
SRPM packages for Buildroot itself, any components needed (uClibc is
already in the distro), the Buildroot build scripts for
buildroot-linuxpba, and the actual package I need (msed).
Hi,
I am packaging python-snappy:
- pypi: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-snappy/0.5
- review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1244514).
I choose to simply name the package python-snappy but as Christopher
Meng pointed out it could conflict with the pypi package simply named
snappy (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/snappy) which is not packaged and
has no link with the snappy package included in fedora.
I proposed to rename it python-python-snappy which match the name of the
package on pypi and on github. Michael Schwendt proposed
python-snappy-bindings as it provides python binding for the snappy
package (Fast compression and decompression library, packaged). I have
no strong opinion on this, hence I am asking here.
Has anyone some thoughts on that?
Regards,
--
Julien Enselme aka Jujens
http://www.jujens.eu/
======================
#fedora-meeting-1: fpc
======================
Meeting started by geppetto at 16:00:37 UTC. The full logs are available
at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2015-07-16/fpc.2015-07-16…
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Roll Call (geppetto, 16:00:38)
* Schedule (geppetto, 16:07:22)
* LINK:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2015-July/010846.html
(geppetto, 16:07:26)
* #506 Guideline Draft: Service First-Time Setup (geppetto, 16:07:32)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/506 (geppetto, 16:07:32)
* ACTION: sgallagh sscg should be in F22 before we publish policy
saying to use it. (geppetto, 17:07:52)
* Open Floor (geppetto, 17:09:20)
Meeting ended at 17:23:42 UTC.
Action Items
------------
* sgallagh sscg should be in F22 before we publish policy saying to use
it.
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* sgallagh
* sgallagh sscg should be in F22 before we publish policy saying to
use it.
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* geppetto (106)
* tibbs|w (95)
* sgallagh (34)
* zodbot (8)
* mbooth (6)
* orionp (5)
* gbcox (2)
* racor (1)
* tibbs (0)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2015-07-16 16:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. rktime):
2015-07-16 09:00 Thu US/Pacific PDT
2015-07-16 12:00 Thu US/Eastern EDT
2015-07-16 16:00 Thu UTC <-
2015-07-16 17:00 Thu Europe/London BST
2015-07-16 18:00 Thu Europe/Paris CEST
2015-07-16 18:00 Thu Europe/Berlin CEST
2015-07-16 21:30 Thu Asia/Calcutta IST
------------------new day----------------------
2015-07-17 00:00 Fri Asia/Singapore SGT
2015-07-17 00:00 Fri Asia/Hong_Kong HKT
2015-07-17 01:00 Fri Asia/Tokyo JST
2015-07-17 02:00 Fri Australia/Brisbane EST
Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13
= New business =
#topic #506 Guideline Draft: Service First-Time Setup
.fpc 506
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/506
= Open Floor =
For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The
report of the agenda items can be found at:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/report/13
If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can reply to
this e-mail, file a new ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fpc,
e-mail me directly, or bring it up at the end of the meeting, during
the open floor topic. Note that added topics may be deferred until
the following meeting.