[opensuse-factory] Attempt to submit neovim to openSUSE:Factory
Hi guys! I'm trying to submit neovim to openSUSE:Factory. There were other users that created a package for it but AFAIK have never submitted to the official devel repos. The problem is that there were many packages needed to build neovim that are not in Factory yet. The list is: _ libunibilium; _ lua51-BitOp; _ lua51-LPeg; _ lua51-MessagePack; _ msgpack 1.3.0; _ python-click 6.2; _ vterm. The status right now is: * lua51-BitOp, lua51-LPeg, and lua51-MessagePack was already accepted in the devel repo devel:languages:lua and they are ready to be submitted to factory. * msgpack 1.3.0 was already accepted in devel:libraries:c_c++ and it is also ready to be submitted to factory. * python-click 6.2 was already accepted in devel:languages:python and it is also ready to be submitted to factory. * libunibilium, as per ismail advice, will be submitted to devel:libraries:c_c++. Thus, my only problem is with vterm. I'm not sure to which devel repo I should submit it. It is not "just" a lib, because it contains three executable files inside it. When I called this package libvterm, rpmlint complained about it. Once all these packages are accepted in Factory, I will submit neovim to editors devel repo. Regards, Ronan Arraes -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas <ronisbr@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi guys!
I'm trying to submit neovim to openSUSE:Factory. There were other users that created a package for it but AFAIK have never submitted to the official devel repos.
The problem is that there were many packages needed to build neovim that are not in Factory yet. The list is:
_ libunibilium; _ lua51-BitOp; _ lua51-LPeg; _ lua51-MessagePack; _ msgpack 1.3.0; _ python-click 6.2; _ vterm.
The status right now is:
* lua51-BitOp, lua51-LPeg, and lua51-MessagePack was already accepted in the devel repo devel:languages:lua and they are ready to be submitted to factory.
* msgpack 1.3.0 was already accepted in devel:libraries:c_c++ and it is also ready to be submitted to factory.
* python-click 6.2 was already accepted in devel:languages:python and it is also ready to be submitted to factory.
* libunibilium, as per ismail advice, will be submitted to devel:libraries:c_c++.
Thus, my only problem is with vterm. I'm not sure to which devel repo I should submit it. It is not "just" a lib, because it contains three executable files inside it. When I called this package libvterm, rpmlint complained about it.
Once all these packages are accepted in Factory, I will submit neovim to editors devel repo.
Regards, Ronan Arraes
It looks like vterm is a specific add on to vim: http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=4546 If so, I'd put it in the editors devel repo where neovim will live. c_c++ is more of a catchall when you can't think of a better place to put something. In general, it is best to have dedicated dependencies like vterm in the same dev repo as the consumer of the api in my experience. As to the package name, libvterm is a perfectly good package name if a majority of the functionality is the library. If there are a few executables that are provided as utilities, just put them in a sub-package. I do that with libpff as an example: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/security:forensics/libpff note, in the case of libpff, upstream calls the exe sub-package "libpff-tools", so I follow that lead and simply ignore the warning from rpmlint that I have a tools package starting with lib in the name. Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Greg, Em 05-12-2015 13:20, Greg Freemyer escreveu:
It looks like vterm is a specific add on to vim:
Actually the vim plugin is another thing. What I am trying to submit is this one: https://launchpad.net/libvterm
As to the package name, libvterm is a perfectly good package name if a majority of the functionality is the library. If there are a few executables that are provided as utilities, just put them in a sub-package.
I do that with libpff as an example: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/security:forensics/libpff
note, in the case of libpff, upstream calls the exe sub-package "libpff-tools", so I follow that lead and simply ignore the warning from rpmlint that I have a tools package starting with lib in the name.
I did exactly what you proposed here. Named the package libvterm and created a libvterm-tools with the executable files. Thanks for the help! I submitted libvterm to devel:libraries:c_c++ and it was accepted. The next step is to submit to openSUSE:Factory. Regards, Ronan Arraes -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday 05 December 2015 13.46:41 Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas wrote:
Hi Greg,
Em 05-12-2015 13:20, Greg Freemyer escreveu:
It looks like vterm is a specific add on to vim:
Actually the vim plugin is another thing. What I am trying to submit is this one:
https://launchpad.net/libvterm
As to the package name, libvterm is a perfectly good package name if a majority of the functionality is the library. If there are a few executables that are provided as utilities, just put them in a sub-package.
I do that with libpff as an example: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/security:forensics/libpff
note, in the case of libpff, upstream calls the exe sub-package "libpff-tools", so I follow that lead and simply ignore the warning from rpmlint that I have a tools package starting with lib in the name.
I did exactly what you proposed here. Named the package libvterm and created a libvterm-tools with the executable files. Thanks for the help!
I submitted libvterm to devel:libraries:c_c++ and it was accepted. The next step is to submit to openSUSE:Factory.
Regards, Ronan Arraes
Also think to make a python3 variant .. devel:languages:python3 is your destination. -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Board, fsfe fellowship GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Bruno, Em 05-12-2015 16:22, Bruno Friedmann escreveu:
Also think to make a python3 variant .. devel:languages:python3 is your destination.
Do you mean a python3 variant of what package? Regards, Ronan Arraes -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday 05 December 2015 16.50:02 Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas wrote:
Hi Bruno,
Em 05-12-2015 16:22, Bruno Friedmann escreveu:
Also think to make a python3 variant .. devel:languages:python3 is your destination.
Do you mean a python3 variant of what package?
Regards, Ronan Arraes
_ python-click 6.2 a python3-click 6.2 should also exist for those who already want python3 as default ;-) -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Board, fsfe fellowship GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi Bruno, Em 05-12-2015 17:48, Bruno Friedmann escreveu:
_ python-click 6.2
a python3-click 6.2 should also exist for those who already want python3 as default ;-)
Ah, ok. But it turns out that there is already a python3-click version in devel:languages:python3: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/devel:languages:python3/python3-clic... In the neovim side, it needs the python2 version because currently the GUI supports only python2. Thanks, Ronan Arraes -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Bruno Friedmann -
Greg Freemyer -
Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas