[opensuse-packaging] spec-cleaner breaking SLES build compatibility?

Greg Freemyer

4 Sep 2012 4 Sep '12

20:20

All, I noticed that security:srm was failing to build for OS 12.2. As part of doing the trivial clean up to make it work I ran spec-cleaner. It made this change in the install section: -make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install +%make_install Now srm in my home project no longer builds for SLES. The relevant error is "line 23: fg: no job control" Is that expected? Should I worry that in fixing OS 12.2 to build I broke SLES? My version of the project is at: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=srm&project=home%3Agregfreemyer%3ATools-for-forensic-boot-cd Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Show replies by date

Cristian Morales Vega

4 Sep 4 Sep

20:30

On 4 September 2012 21:20, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...

Is that expected?

Yes, it is -> http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2012-05/msg00115.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Michael Schroeder

5 Sep 5 Sep

09:31

New subject: [opensuse-packaging] spec-cleaner breaking SLES build compatibility?

On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:30:52PM +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...

On 4 September 2012 21:20, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...
Is that expected?

Yes, it is -> http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2012-05/msg00115.html

<cite> Spec cleaner was written to support only the latest distributions. </cite> Too bad, that makes spec cleaner pretty useless. Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Cristian Morales Vega

09:38

On 5 September 2012 10:31, Michael Schroeder wrote:

...

On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:30:52PM +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...
On 4 September 2012 21:20, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...
Is that expected?

Yes, it is -> http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2012-05/msg00115.html

<cite> Spec cleaner was written to support only the latest distributions. </cite>

Too bad, that makes spec cleaner pretty useless.

I think it actually supports every supported openSUSE version, and even the unsupported 11.3. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Vincent Untz

09:42

Le mercredi 05 septembre 2012, à 11:31 +0200, Michael Schroeder a écrit :

...

On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:30:52PM +0100, Cristian Morales Vega wrote:

...
On 4 September 2012 21:20, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...
Is that expected?

Yes, it is -> http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2012-05/msg00115.html

<cite> Spec cleaner was written to support only the latest distributions. </cite>

Too bad, that makes spec cleaner pretty useless.

For you, maybe. But not for everyone: people not caring about SLE11 builds will be happy with it. It should not be difficult to add an option to enable outputting something that would also work for SLE11. Nobody cared enough to do it, though. Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Pavol Rusnak

09:56

On 05/09/12 11:31, Michael Schroeder wrote:

...

...
Yes, it is -> http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2012-05/msg00115.html

<cite> Spec cleaner was written to support only the latest distributions. </cite>

Too bad, that makes spec cleaner pretty useless.

That's one way of looking at it. Another would be that SLE is loosing external packaging efforts, because its maintainers are reluctant to include the most obvious changes that would make packaging for it WAY more easier (correct %make_install macro, noarch subpackages, pkgconfig support, to give a few examples). It's not like it's a new issue or something. Some people were screaming for this for years. Or put it in another words: it's pretty useless for SLE, but works fine for distros that are not using obsolete version of RPM and macro definitions (openSUSE, Fedora and all RHEL clones). -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol Rusnak PGP 0xB9A02A3D prusnak[at]opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Michael Schroeder

10:01

New subject: [opensuse-packaging] spec-cleaner breaking SLES build compatibility?

On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 11:56:06AM +0200, Pavol Rusnak wrote:

...

That's one way of looking at it. Another would be that SLE is loosing external packaging efforts, because its maintainers are reluctant to include the most obvious changes that would make packaging for it WAY more easier (correct %make_install macro, noarch subpackages, pkgconfig support, to give a few examples).

"noarch" subpackages whould mean to update to a newer rpm version, with lots of compatibility issues. Adding new macros should be ok. (And yes, compatibility *is* an issue for SLES customers.) BUT: It makes no sense to do this in the project config, as that means that the customers can't recreate the package from the source rpm.

...

Or put it in another words: it's pretty useless for SLE, but works fine for distros that are not using obsolete version of RPM and macro definitions (openSUSE, Fedora and all RHEL clones).

Is RHEL really different to SLES in that regard? Cheers, Michael. -- Michael Schroeder mls@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);} -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Pavol Rusnak

10:10

On 05/09/12 12:01, Michael Schroeder wrote:

...

"noarch" subpackages whould mean to update to a newer rpm version, with lots of compatibility issues. Adding new macros should be ok. (And yes, compatibility *is* an issue for SLES customers.)

Well, kernel team was able to update major kernel version between SLE11SP1 and SP2. It's all about priorities and manpower I guess.

...

BUT: It makes no sense to do this in the project config, as that means that the customers can't recreate the package from the source rpm.

I didn't know that is required. With all these various OBS subprojects it's very hard to find a package which builds with default config and I'm not even mentioning building OBS src.rpm under non-SUSE distros.

...

...
Or put it in another words: it's pretty useless for SLE, but works fine for distros that are not using obsolete version of RPM and macro definitions (openSUSE, Fedora and all RHEL clones).

Is RHEL really different to SLES in that regard?

My guess would be that RHEL 5 and RHEL 6 are using RPM 4.6.x for quite some time now. But I don't know for sure. -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol Rusnak PGP 0xB9A02A3D prusnak[at]opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

4259

Age (days ago)

4260

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

7 comments

5 participants

participants (5)

Cristian Morales Vega
Greg Freemyer
Michael Schroeder
Pavol Rusnak
Vincent Untz

[opensuse-packaging] spec-cleaner breaking SLES build compatibility?

tags

participants (5)