I've written spec files for a few packages that weren't available for SUSE, purely picked at random, just to see how well I can do at producing packages. The packages I've built successfully build on all SUSE versions from 9.0 to 10.0, although I don't foresee any problems building them on the 10.1 alphas/betas. What I'd like is for someone who's rather more experienced at packaging, which wouldn't take much really, to have a look at the spec files and see if there's anything that could be done to improve things[0]. At present I've copied the spec files and source RPMs to the free web-space provided by my ISP. Unfortunately, due to lack of space, I haven't been able to copy any of the pre-build packages. I would have hosted them on my home server, but that's on the end of a 256Kbps up-link that's presently pretty close to saturation (limited to ~80-90%) due to me keeping the 10.0, 10.0 delta[1] and 10.1alpha2 torrents running. The specs and source RPMs are presently located at: URL:http://www.davjam.demon.co.uk/srpms/ Any suggestions, hints, tips, criticism, etc. (gratefully?) received. [0] I've already started using "install -D ..." in place of "mkdir -p" and "install ..." although, in some instances, it's failed to work in some instances so I've had to use "mkdir" and "install" [1] Not sure why I've still got the delta torrent still running as there doesn't seem to be many people either sharing or downloading the deltas. Regards, David Bolt -- Member of Team Acorn checking nodes at 50 Mnodes/s: http://www.distributed.net/ AMD1800 1Gb WinXP/SuSE 9.3 | AMD1300 512Mb SuSE 9.0 | AMD2400 256Mb SuSE 9.0 AMD2400 160Mb SuSE 10.0 | Falcon 14Mb TOS 4.02 | STE 4Mb TOS 1.62 RPC600 129Mb RISCOS 3.6 | A3010 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 | A4000 4Mb RISCOS 3.11
What I'd like is for someone who's rather more experienced at packaging, which wouldn't take much really, to have a look at the spec files and see if there's anything that could be done to improve things[0].
Looks good to me (looking at alienpool.spec at the moment), in fact it looks better than most of my .specs :) (That said mine tend to be based on the internal SUSE conventions for .spec files and I'm too lazy to change ;)) -- James Ogley james@usr-local-bin.org Packages for SUSE: http://usr-local-bin.org/rpms Make Poverty History: http://makepovertyhistory.org
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005, James Ogley
What I'd like is for someone who's rather more experienced at packaging, which wouldn't take much really, to have a look at the spec files and see if there's anything that could be done to improve things[0].
Looks good to me (looking at alienpool.spec at the moment), in fact it looks better than most of my .specs :)
Well, I will admit that it's not all my work. I actually based the spec files on the pre-existing Mandrake spec files, although I did have to re-write quite a few bits. The alienpool.spec was the most "fun" to adapt as I first needed to figure out all the %_games*dir macros, then I ended up completely re-writing the %install section as it didn't work, and then I finished by correcting the %files section. That was after having to start afresh with all the autoconf tools so that I could make a new "configure" that worked. Aircrack.spec was also based on a Mandrake spec file, which I updated to a newer source. I made a mistake in the %changelog section for that as, when I updated the source, I used ctrl-k and ctrl-u[0] and then edited that line, instead of ctrl-k, ctrl-u and ctrl-u, and editing the first line and adding a line underneath. I've corrected that mistake and the proper changelog should now be there.
(That said mine tend to be based on the internal SUSE conventions for .spec files and I'm too lazy to change ;))
[0] nano[1] delete and "undo" delete. [1] not to start another editor flame-fest... Regards, David Bolt -- Member of Team Acorn checking nodes at 50 Mnodes/s: http://www.distributed.net/ AMD1800 1Gb WinXP/SuSE 9.3 | AMD1300 512Mb SuSE 9.0 | AMD2400 256Mb SuSE 9.0 AMD2400 160Mb SuSE 10.0 | Falcon 14Mb TOS 4.02 | STE 4Mb TOS 1.62 RPC600 129Mb RISCOS 3.6 | A3010 4Mb RISCOS 3.11 | A4000 4Mb RISCOS 3.11
Op zondag 23 oktober 2005 02:03, schreef David Bolt:
The specs and source RPMs are presently located at:
URL:http://www.davjam.demon.co.uk/srpms/
Any suggestions, hints, tips, criticism, etc. (gratefully?) received.
It would be if the packager tag is filled in (missing at the moment). can't this be removed mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/%{name}/patch install -m 644 linux/patch/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/%{name}/patch and replaced with : %doc linux/patch/* in de files section? I would put a check around: %clean %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot} if %{buildroot} != / and not empty then remove the directory. Perhaps suse can provide a macro for this one? -- Richard Bos Without a home the journey is endless
Hi, On Sunday, October 23, 2005 at 10:26:21, Richard Bos wrote:
I would put a check around: %clean %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot}
if %{buildroot} != / and not empty then remove the directory.
Perhaps suse can provide a macro for this one?
rpmbuild checks that by itself. You can safely do rm -rf %{buildroot} in clean. Henne -- Henne Vogelsang, http://hennevogel.de "To die. In the rain. Alone" Ernest Hemingway
Hallo, Am Sun, 23 Oct 2005, Henne Vogelsang schrieb: [..]
rpmbuild checks that by itself. You can safely do rm -rf %{buildroot} in clean.
What about %install %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot} What about %clean %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot} %{__rm} -rf %{_builddir}/%{buildsubdir} What do you think about removing the builddir as well? -dnh -- For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken
participants (5)
-
David Bolt -
David Haller -
Henne Vogelsang -
James Ogley -
Richard Bos