Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (818 mails)

< Previous Next >
[opensuse] Re: [opensuse-factory] Re: openSUSE build & testing procedure and faulty pruning of builds causing build failures
Nelson Marques wrote:
---
Could you point the sources and documentation for the tools
you use to produce binary & source RPM's, *OTHER* than rpmbuild?
^^^^^^^ (i.e. opensuSE uses to build the source and binary RPM's)...


There's a lot of them... The Apache OpenOffice for example is
distributed in RPMs
---
If opensuse distributes Apache OO, then why are the binary and
source RPM's not part of the 12.1 distribution directories?


and those are build in an Ubuntu system (the rpm
build host is actually named 'ubuntu-desktop'). People who work with
Ruby have rgem2rpm in rpm; There's tools in
perl and python which can
^^^^
--------------
So far you and at least multiple others didn't answer my question
and seem to have an impaired ability to read.

I'm not asking what *can* be done. I'm
asking what products are built in OpenSuSE NOT using rpmbuild at any
point during their build?

You mention perl -- if that's a representative example,
You build tons of perl packages --- many of which are built using perl
make and such... but they are all packaged at the end by rpmlib.


Engineers should know how to do research. If I'm not mistaken rpmbuild
is actually a part of RPM and not of OBS, or is it not?
----
More than research, the ability to read a flow chart is probably
more vital.

rpmbuild is a separate program from rpm, so no it's not part of rpm,
it runs off the rpmlib library. So you are saying that rpmbuild is not used
at any point in the OBS process that produces an openSuSE release?

I have alot of src rpms that say otherwise.


I don't think there has ever been any question whether or not
rpmbuild was used or supported.

You should address that to RPM upstream, no?
---
??? the RPM project should address whether or not Osuse
uses or supports building with rpmbuild? I don't think you are responding
to what I am saying.




The issue is about what is already installed in your
build environment. [Open]SuSE, if you remember, rarely used
BuildRequires before suse10.

Previous versions of RPM (< 4.10) don't support native LZMA; Are you
going to bash down RPM upstream too because they didn't have
implemented it on the past ? Shame on them.
????
Huh?...Can you describe a situation where you want to build
something requiring lzma where it wouldn't be available on the distro
sources you are building?





Separate "-devel" packages weren't widely used if at all
sometime before 10 or 9. It was assumed they were included by installing
the product.

Keep those also on servers with compilers :)
---
You mean where you would be *building products*?


I'm sure a few skilled
persons will love that... Honestly why would a Desktop user or a
Server need development packages, specially when it's RPM managed (be
it yum, zypper or any other)?
----
We are only talking people who use their systems to build
or rebuild current packages and whether or not a current system with all
the devel packages installed should work or not...

If they aren't building, it's a moot point.

I'm not suggesting that it is wrong to separate them.

But to only be able to generate packages on systems where you
don't have specific devel packages installed sounds more than
a little arcane.



People who need devel packages know they exist, so if they need them,
install them. If you don't like, Slackware works in a different way,
and they see that as a feature. Move to Slackware.
----
Again, you miss the point.



You never used RHEL in your life did you! Red Hat has twice the number
of RPMs in 'optinals' (> 6000) repository than you have on the base
distro (~3300). Guess what... the optionals repository is mainly devel
packages from the packages on the distro... So they even do it in a
more complicated.
----
It was the first distro i used in it's 5.0 era, mandrake in the 6.x
era, and suse since ~ 6.8 I wanna say, but 7.x for sure... it's been
a while, ok?



Your problem is that you don't know the tools you want to use and you
expect that by an act of a superior entity things will magically
happen... Take my word, it doesn't work like that. Research... basic
stuff for any engineer.
----
You are tilting at strawmen. You are arguing points and claiming
things that don't respond to what I wrote.

Please try again. I did my research... Just did it again.
Nope..no openoffice packages available for 12.1... I think there was in the 11
series... but I see libreoffice, goffice, & koffice.

http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/12.1/repo/oss/suse/x86_64/

Don't see the sources for it under the source tree either


(http://download.opensuse.org/source/distribution/12.1/repo/oss/suse/src/)...



For that matter, it used to be that doc packages were usually
not separate either.

This might be controversial, but I do tend to agree with the
splitting. On a production server or Desktop most people will never
require the API documentation of the components. While developers do
need that documentation. So the developers should know how to install
the documentation. Not everyone wants useless documentation (for their
tasks) installed by default. It's a feature and it's quite nice.
----
I am not saying those are bad practice, I'm talking about what used
to be common practice and expectations.

Sterile systems were all but impossible 10 years ago for a distro
build.



If OSC/OSB is required to build a distro, why is it not
included in the shipped distro binaries and source rpms?

[nmarques@gangrena ~]$ osc --version && cat /etc/redhat-release
0.135
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 6.3 (Santiago)


I don't even have openSUSE installed and I had no problems finding
---
I didn't say I couldn't find them, I said why are they not shipped
with the distributions they build?


Show me the packages under the above URL's where the distro is located.
If OBS/osc is required to build openSUSE, then it is part of the required
tool chain -- and the words of the license of the GPL were posted on the factory list
earlier, saying that the toolset to generate the the build must also be
included.

Binary distribution (online) has been listed as 'fine'... but it
requires you stay in business and the sources STAY on line. It also require
knowing what tools you used to build a *given* distribution... (not just the
latest copy)...

That's another of the nice things about building in chroot
environments; you won't crash yourself against this kind of issues...
---
Unless you are building and installing kernels, you shouldn't
be crashing yourself on a build anyway.

Installing ?? you get what you install...but when rpmbuilds
it does not build in a chroot env... and it has never caused any system
corruption or crashes

"/var/tmp/BUILDROOT/packagename/" is not a chrooted pathname --

For that matter, I can look in /usr/packages/build/package-version and see the
build
that was just done.




Functional Analphabetism is the inability that one has (regardless of
his/hers academical formation) .

That you would be familiar with this term is not surprising.
Thank you for informing me. I should read up on how to communicate
to such people.

Interpersonally -- 1:1 I do alot better, but writing 'at a group',
seems like there are always people who completely misinterpret what is
written -- while others can see it plain as day. Maybe has to do with
the differences in how english is taught and learned -- especially in
other countries -- and as filtered through their own mental language.

I'm sorry if my writing was unclear.


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups