November 2005 - openSUSE Packaging - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Announcement: tools for web developers (tidy, mod_tidy, w3c markup validator)
by Sierk Bornemann 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

Hi! I am primary a web developer, and my interest is very high, that the popular SUSE Linux offers tools to make a (web-)developer's life easier. Fedora has an eye on developers, also Debian. Why not also SUSE? Making the openSUSE platform interesting for developers more than ever before? Since month, I build my own RPMs of tidy (http://tidy.sourceforge.net) and mod_tidy (http://mod-tidy.sourceforge.net/) which both have been also taken as a basis for SuSEs current tidy packages on ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/apache/tidy/ and mod_tidy packages on ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/apache/apache-mod_tidy/. Unfortunately, SUSEs official packages are not updated so regulary, as I wish they could be, so I want to point to my resources on http://sierkbornemann.de/pub/tools/tidy/ and http://sierkbornemann.de/pub/tools/mod_tidy/, where I store much more up-to-date RPMs for SUSE Linux. The mod_tidy packages, recently shipped with SUSE Linux 10 are outdated. Since I have overtaken the project, some important things have been changed (updated License, updated code, etc.). These URLs on my personal site are still inofficial (for developers only). I hope, that in long time view the official SuSE resources get in sync with wether my packages, which try to be as close and up-to-date as possible to the original, or with the official resources. Since several weeks, I also offer the official W3C Markup Validator of http://validator.w3.org/ as a RPM for SUSE Linux. These packages are still located on http://sierkbornemann.de/pub/tools/w3c-markup-validator/. As it happened with my tidy and mod_tidy packages, I hope, my w3c validator packages will be copyied to one of SUSEs FTP-Servers and offered from there to the public (here again, I want to keep the traffic to my server in a reasonable limit, that's because I hope, that somebody of Novell/SuSE gives them a place on a public SuSE FTP server). Concerning the W3C Markup Validator, I went on optimizing it for local use (the W3C developers themselves have an eye on it and made a lot of adjustments). It's easy to install and configurate. Hints for improvements are welcome (this belongs to the validator as to tidy and to mod_tidy). For the near future, I aim SUSE Linux packages of the W3C Validator to be also mentioned on http://validator.w3.org/source/ (besides Fedora and Debian packages). I have strong encouragement from the Validator Dev team in continuing so. and I still hope, Novell/SUSE is able to give me more official assistance (minimum: updating more frequently the packages taken from me). So, have a look into my packages, try them out. Any help for improvements and advocacy is welcome. Sierk Bornemann Sierk Bornemann | Hannover | Germany e-mail: sierkb(a)gmx.de URL: http://sierkbornemann.de/

2 2

Patch RPM's and the -P option
by Scott Lowrey 02 Dec '05

02 Dec '05

The rpm command on SuSE 9.1 and 9.3 provides a patch select option (-P, --patches). I have not had a chance to review rpm on OpenSUSE, yet but will be doing that soon, so apologies if this message appears to be a bit misdirected - it's not. :-) Anyway, I'm guessing that a patch RPM is a "partial package" that does not contain all files, instead providing only the files that have been updated? If I issue the "rpm -qPa" command, I see a small subset of RPMs - notably, those that appear to have been applied as part of an online update. The Red Hat/Fedora/rpm.org guides and the master RPM change list do not document a -P option. Can someone give me some background? Is this a SuSE creation? What distinguishes a patch RPM from a regular RPM? I do know that any RPM can be considered a "patch" or "update", but I have a need to track RPMs that have been specifically applied in response to customer problem reports - this feature seems to meet that need. Thanks for your help. -Scott Lowrey

6 7

Buggy binutils package on 10.0
by Pascal Bleser 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The binutils on 10.0 has a bug, it doesn't work well when using gcc 3.3.x or 3.4.x When using the latest binutils (2.16.1, compiled from source) it works, but when using the binutils package shipped with SL 10.0 (2.16.91.0.2-8), I get the following when building shared libs: `.L631' referenced in section `.rodata' of build/linux26-gcc344-ora920-d/carma/otl_result_set.os: defined in discarded section `.gnu.linkonce.t._Z17otl_var_type_namei' of build/linux26-gcc344-ora920-d/carma/otl_result_set.os `.L612' referenced in section `.rodata' of build/linux26-gcc344-ora920-d/carma/otl_result_set.os: defined in discarded section `.gnu.linkonce.t._Z17otl_var_type_namei' of build/linux26-gcc344-ora920-d/carma/otl_result_set.os `.L613' referenced in section `.rodata' of build/linux26-gcc344-ora920-d/carma/otl_result_set.os: defined in discarded section `.gnu.linkonce.t._Z17otl_var_type_namei' of etc.. etc... I've been googling on that, and it definately seems to be a binutils bug. The gcc src.rpm shipped with SL 10.0 includes some patches, one of which might be a workaround for that binutils issue, but I cannot apply it to 3.4.x (and I definately need 3.4.x in this case). Now, with that background and while you're already replying "this is off-topic" ;)), I wanted to ask if anyone was already providing newer binutils packages in his repository ? I'll file a bug for this anyway but I'll most probably try to isolate a backport patch for this very issue. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v FOSDEM 2006 -- 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDiyKOr3NMWliFcXcRAjrPAKCzmpvT//awy7PUSgD3KVTcBLX8IwCfa+hB 2ba2ZiPUN+ZCgTcX3y/KbOc= =3S2G -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

suser-guru updates
by Pascal Bleser 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I didn't do for a while.. here's a list of new packages in my repository (and a few updates I think I didn't mention yet) kde3-windeco-flatknifty flatknifty windeco for KDE3 kwin-decor-suse2 suse2 windeco for KDE3 kde3-style-lipstik lipstik style for KDE3 kde3-style-klearlook klearlook style for KDE3 kbfx kicker button replacement for KDE3 enca encoding converter and guesser olive console RSS reader colorscheme color scheme creation tool for GNOME basket note/url/text organizer for KDE3 kftpgrabber ftp client for KDE3 wavemixer multi-track sound file mixer (GTK2) librasc library for pulling sound samples remotely, used by wavemixer xmms-agent KDE3 systray for xmms kasablanca ftp client for KDE3 kflickr-mt kflickr (flickr client for KDE3) fork qiv quick image viewer xprintidle small tool that uses XSS xorg extension to show user idle time mguesser file encoding and charset guesser gcfilms movie collection management (GNOME) perl-dbd-sqlite Perl::DBI driver for SQLite3 perl-config-yaml Perl::Config::Yaml module perl-curses-ui Perl::Curses::UI module python-pexpect expect module for Python cutmp3 MP3 file cutter httping ping for HTTP protocol mrxvt multi-tab rxvt port codeblocks C++ IDE libut library for writing daemons If you notice any conflict with something you maintain yourself, please let me know and we'll sort it out, no reason to duplicate work. This is really starting to grow and I get the feeling that using the mailing-list for this isn't really appropriate. Maybe we should have a page on the wiki that lists *ALL* the packages we maintain, by repository. Could help avoiding packaging something that's already included in another repository. But also extra work of adding new packages to that wiki page (which isn't all that much effort IMHO, and don't complain, I'm the one who'd have the most work ;)). I'll post new versions of my spec file templates soon, as I revamped them completely, made them simpler and y2pmbuild-ready and they even seem to be ok for some SUSE devs (nicht wahr Marcus? ;P). Have a nice snowy week-end everyone. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDiItor3NMWliFcXcRAqoTAKCKUK+i5qpzYfoSQMHUmKWoKgE3NwCgl786 5ZHoxXtoOz+4gq0p6Wt+ZOQ= =lRuS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

suser-guru updates for 2005-11-28
by Pascal Bleser 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 New packages for today (up to now): remake gnu make fork with gdb support and better error messages acpitool cli acpi client cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDiq0hr3NMWliFcXcRApojAKCT+YHcPG4RRV42Dko+pVoS1wiT2ACgkhal ykhHKnaCjbX2ZyfhCdSanm4= =iNcn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

suser-guru updates 2005-11-28
by Pascal Bleser 27 Nov '05

27 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 calcurse organizer written with ncurses (console) perl-File-Find-Rule perl-Number-Compare perl-Text-Glob clamtk perl/gtk2 frontend for clamav mcabber console jabber client freetalk jabber cli client kshutdown versatile shutdown app for kde (+ updates) - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDij+Hr3NMWliFcXcRAu40AJ4pxi+HQfDgpINvFWF8+/jDcd0P1QCfT8Fj 33GJd9r0wOmQsSA6u6HqKJ4= =sq58 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

httrack 3.33.16
by Detlef Reichelt 27 Nov '05

27 Nov '05

Added Package httrack http://packman.links2linux.de/?action=747 Detlef www.die-mafia.de ;)

1 0

Today's php4 YOU update broken (?)
by Pascal Bleser 27 Nov '05

27 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 (php4 package maintainer in CC:) The Yast Online Update for php4 that came in this morning (for SUSE 10.0) seems to be broken: it makes Apache httpd processes segfault. My guess is that both php4 and apache2-mod_php4 were updated but not the other php4-* packages (such as php4-gettext, which I'm using extensively, and I'm pretty sure that's the one that triggered the segfault). After the online update, I had php4 = 4.4.0-6.2 and apache2-mod_php4 = 4.4.0-6.2 installed but all the other php4-* packages were still at 4.4.0-6. Solution: I downgraded those two packages back to 4.4.0-6 and now it works again: smart install php4=4.4.0-6 apache2-mod_php4=4.4.0-6 cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v FOSDEM 2006 -- 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDhxInr3NMWliFcXcRApfUAJ0TjrTeQDOKlW/ddk2fxVFNrYfWYQCgsCE2 MhnXm2AqMU539TF3pxyySeI= =bM/Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 3

Improving AMSN packaging
by Mauricio Teixeira (netmask) 25 Nov '05

25 Nov '05

Hi Guillermo! I'm new to SUSE and I saw your message on opensuse mailing list about the AMSN CVS package. I've been an old AMSN packager myself, and I've contributed with the project since a long time, so I think I have quite some experience on packaging it. So, I'm sending you my specs and my cvs update script that I've made to Mandriva, so that you can check and see if there is something interesting to get merged into yours. I was thinking about porting my packages into SUSE, but since you've already done it, maybe it's easier if we work together. I also have some old AMSN packages build into Conectiva, and I was thinking about reworking the mandriva packages in quite the same way. You can check them here: ftp://mirror.de9.ime.eb.br/pub/conectiva/contrib/10/conectiva/RPMS.mt/ http://mteixeira.webset.net/pub/amsn/ By the way, those are considered the official AMSN packages for Conectiva (as stated on the AMSN's website). On the CVS version I have all features working, including plugins (even webcam, and traydock) Also you can check my current Mandriva packages here: http://mteixeira.webset.net/pub/cooker-i586/netmask/ Well, I hope we can get along with it! See ya! -- % Mauricio Teixeira (netmask) % mteixeira{a}webset{d}net <> Maceio/AL/BR % TI+Telecom Analyst <> Linux Specialist % http://mteixeira.webset.net <> http://pmping.sf.net % [D0CE 6BD4 526B B7D1 6F4E 85FA A7A0 1A6F B23A A9EE]

2 1

Packaging advice
by David Bolt 24 Nov '05

24 Nov '05

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

5 5

Re: [opensuse] amsn_cvs RPM
by Pascal Bleser 24 Nov '05

24 Nov '05

Guillermo Ballester Valor wrote: > Hello, Hola Guillermo > I've build new RPM packages for amsn, cvs version. They are called 'amsn_cvs' > and have some nice and new features with respect the relased 'amsn 0.94'. > Note that it is a development version. > To install 'amsn_cvs' RPMs you need uninstall 'amsn' because of some > conflicts. If both packages conflict anyway, why do you call it "amsn_cvs" and not just "amsn" ? IMHO the best name/version scheme would be amsn-0.94_20051123-1... That way it would supersede amsn-0.94 and yet, when a new release comes out (either 0.94.1 or 0.95), the release version will supersede the CVS snapshot again. amsn-0.94 amsn-0.94_20051123 => upgrade amsn-0.94_20051205 => upgrade amsn-0.94.1 => upgrade or amsn-0.95 => upgrade as well It's a similar trick than how to handle "rc" (release candidate), "alpha" or "beta" versions, where you'd use a _0.1 (beta1), _0.2 (beta2) suffix: amsn-0.95_0.1 => 0.95 beta1 amsn-0.95_0.2 => 0.95 beta2 amsn-0.95_1.0 => 0.95 release Because if you use "rc1" or "beta1" in the version tag, it won't upgrade properly: amsn-0.95beta1 amsn-0.95beta2 => will upgrade, ok amsn-0.95 ======> won't upgrade (!) On a sidenote, could you also build and include amsn's systray plugin ? I've seen 2 or 3 people asking for amsn packages that include that. Would be nice, especially as an addon RPM (e.g. amsn-systray) ;) (and some work as well, the amsn source code is an awful mess) (and maybe we should take this thread to the opensuse-packaging list, that's why I'm cross-posting ;)) cheers -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v FOSDEM 2006 -- 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels

5 10

update-desktop-files and gcc on Factory
by Damian Mihai Liviu 24 Nov '05

24 Nov '05

Hello, I'm trying to build some RPMS for Factory and I have some problems. First of all, y2pmbuild doesn't find update-desktop-files. I didn't find it either on the factory tree... Is OK or I will have problems if this RPM is missing? Second, I took the CD-s from Alpha 3, created a local repository, downloaded gcc-ada, libada, libunwind and added to them to the repository. After that, I did an "create_package_descr -x setup/descr/EXTRA_PROV -l english -l spanish -l french -l german -l czech -l hungarian -l italian" and refreshed the repository in YaST. When I'm trying to build the RPMS I want to I get the following error: // begin unresolvable dependencies: *** Conflicts *** Name: gcc(*) Edition: EDITION-UNSPEC From-Input-List: yes Referers: gcc-ada-4.1.0_20051116-3 requires gcc = 4.1.0_20051116-3 Not-Available: [4.1.0_20051116-3,4.1.0_20051116-3] Name: gcc-ada Edition: 4.1.0_20051116-3 From-Input-List: yes Unresolvable: gcc-ada-4.1.0_20051116-3 requires gcc = 4.1.0_20051116-3 // end What should I do? Cheers, -- Damian Mihai Liviu Mobile: +40 741 226993; Fax: +1 347-632-4117 Phone : +1 360-526-6441; +1 347-632-4117; +44 0870-3403339 URL: http://liviudm.blogspot.com

2 1

xmlsec and libgeier
by Rauch Christian 24 Nov '05

24 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hash: SHA1 Added Package 'xmlsec' (http://www.aleksey.com/xmlsec/download.html) in version 1.2.9 Updated package 'libgeier' (http://www.taxbird.de) to 0.4. Should be available in latest 24 hours on [1] [1] ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/misc/suser-crauch/ Christian Rauch -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDhbjKayhvFxrDZlkRAlh3AJ0RmZeBBu2hAVIQWK8rK3mfNVZjhwCfVu5Q MB53Lepi1mEdGSi648GV25U= =EyOY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

TaxBird 0.5
by Rauch Christian 22 Nov '05

22 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Updated package 'taxbird' (http://www.taxbird.de) to 0.5. Dependency libgeier available in actual version 0.3 on my repo. [1] ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/misc/suser-crauch/ Christian Rauch -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDguWaayhvFxrDZlkRAjdbAJ9Fjxl8vxfnNQA0C9v5zgz3vudItACfXWma m1QgLUvixOkl3lo1fOn8RDc= =MSV5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

A doubt about java rpms
by Guillermo Ballester Valor 21 Nov '05

21 Nov '05

Hello all, I've been playing with suse java-1_5_0-sun.spec and update it with latest 1_5_0-05 build from sun site archives. The rpms have been built with success in my SuSE 9.3 system. The question is ¿Can we release this rpms?. There are java rpms on SuSE site and mirrors but I'm not sure about release conditions. I'm afraid I can't, only SuSE can relase them :( . I'm wrong? Guillermo -- Guillermo Ballester Valor gbv(a)oxixares.com Ogijares, Granada SPAIN Public GPG KEY http://www.oxixares.com/~gbv/pubgpg.html #################################################### See World Weather Navigator at http://www.ogimet.com ####################################################

7 12

RPM building toolchain (was: Policy for SUSE supplementary repository ?)
by Pascal Bleser 21 Nov '05

21 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Henne Vogelsang wrote: > Hi, > > On Sunday, November 20, 2005 at 01:15:58, Pascal Bleser wrote: > >> Does anyone happen to know (and I hope a few packagers @SUSE are >> reading this list ;)) if there's some kind of policy for SUSE's >> supplementary repositories ? > > Nothing other than: "it should build" ... >> The question is: do you (SUSE devs) always keep up with the latest >> versions of applications that are in supplementary ? Or is it "when we >> have the time" ? I can imagine it has low priority.. > > True. It all depends on how the maintainer finds time.... Ok. Thanks for clarifying. As already discussed very briefly on IRC with Stephan Binner, this leads us again to what Robert (AFAICR) pointed out in one of his mails: the SUSE staff using different tools than the community packagers. Mostly because the spec files made by SUSE developers only work on one single SUSE Linux release, where as almost all community packagers maintain their RPMs for several SUSE versions. I guess most of use work "single source" (i.e. one spec file / src.rpm for all SUSE releases). Because of "neededforbuild" including packages that are absolutely not related to building the package or not (e.g. selinux), one cannot use a src.rpm of SUSE Linux 10.0 and build it on, say, 9.2 or 9.3. I don't see the point of "neededforbuild" anyway. Stephan told me it was because symbolic names like "kde-devel-environment" (or something like that), but those should be virtual provides in the first place (or an empty package that just "Requires:" (kdelibs3-devel, qt3-devel, etc...) and "Provides: kde-devel-environment"). I mean, other distributions are able to handle it without relying on special tools (besides chroot management). I have to say that personally, I don't like the idea of having to use specific tools (except rpmbuild) to be able to build spec files, instead of just using rpmbuild. Wrapper scripts are nice because they can help with managing the chroots, automagically installing required dependencies in those chroots (like y2pmbuild is doing), but one mustn't rely on - - a specific toolchain that does some black magic with spec files - - specific rpmmacros settings that are not standard (some distributions are doing that, but it should be avoided if possible) While such tools or environments can provide extra value (e.g. the chroot management of y2pmbuild), they should do a plain rpmbuild in the end, because you get a different behaviour if you just use rpmbuild or, say, y2pmbuild. But maybe that's just my opinion ;) And, yes, I know this is supposed to be solved by the build servers in some 4 months from now, at least the fact that SUSE devs and community packagers use different toolsets. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser <loki(a)fosdem.org> http://www.fosdem.org /\\ FOSDEM 2006 :: 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels _\_v Free and Opensource Software Developers European Meeting -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDga8hr3NMWliFcXcRAlTrAJ4gUdRWEKBi3zzE7QtlnIv78ZR//gCfUNnZ wCGNo2jsG3ak7XqIVpMyGoA= =9IXf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Policy for SUSE supplementary repository ?
by Pascal Bleser 21 Nov '05

21 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi folks Does anyone happen to know (and I hope a few packagers @SUSE are reading this list ;)) if there's some kind of policy for SUSE's supplementary repositories ? I mean, I might be wrong but I have the feeling that sometimes, new stuff gets packaged and included there but... - - not everything (which isn't a problem, work for us community packagers) - - sometimes with a delay of several days or even weeks after the released The 2nd point is quite annoying for us community packagers (well at least it is for me), as sometimes we do package newest versions (as SUSE only provides backported security fixes) and then a few days (or sometimes 1-2 weeks) later, it shows up in KDE or GNOME supplementary. It's nice and all, but if someone working @SUSE tells me he's maintaining things like amarok or k3b and always keeps up with the latest releases, I don't see the point in me having a few hours of work to package them as well (except maybe providing them for SUSE versions that are not in supplementary) ;) The question is: do you (SUSE devs) always keep up with the latest versions of applications that are in supplementary ? Or is it "when we have the time" ? I can imagine it has low priority.. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <pascal.bleser(a)skynet.be> <guru(a)unixtech.be> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDf8A+r3NMWliFcXcRAtGKAKCyZddQatLdS6Q92gZGwtUkqTgfkgCgg0t0 DGwL64TGYNhrUN4XMPBSLDw= =+cpf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: [A-A-P-develop] I uploaded an RPM to Mandriva/Mandrake
by Aschwin Marsman 20 Nov '05

20 Nov '05

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005, Ian S. Nelson wrote: > Aschwin Marsman wrote: > >On Tue, 15 Nov 2005, Ian S. Nelson wrote: Hi Ian, > >>I've built an RPM for a-a-p and started the process to try and get in > >>included in to Mandriva. > >> > >I would like to do the same for openSUSE. I think I would need: > >- a source rpm > >- an idea on how much a-a-p is used so I convince the maintainers to > > include the package > > > >I can't download from mandriva incoming. I would like to have the > >source rpm so I can try if it works on SUSE 10.0 out of the box. > > Here is the source RPM. Thanks. I'm also sending this reply to the opensuse-packaging mailing list. Therefor I also attached your original spec file and do I need some advertising: A-A-P makes it easy to locate, download, build and install software. It also supports browsing source code, developing programs, managing different versions and distribution of software and documentation. This means that A-A-P is useful both for users and for developers. http://www.a-a-p.org/ A-A-P is created by vim creator Bram Moolenaar. I installed it on SUSE 10.0: --------------8<--------------8<--------------8<-------------- rpm -Uvh a-a-p-1.079-1mdk.src.rpm 1:a-a-p warning: user ian does not exist - using root warning: group ian does not exist - using root warning: user ian does not exist - using root warning: group ian does not exist - using root ########################################### [100%] --------------8<--------------8<--------------8<-------------- So the spec file needs to be adjusted so it will be installed as user root without warnings. Installing the src.rpm gives a dependancy problem: --------------8<--------------8<--------------8<-------------- rpmbuild --rebuild /home/marsman/projects/aap/a-a-p-1.07 Installing /home/marsman/projects/aap/a-a-p-1.079-1mdk.src.rpm warning: user ian does not exist - using root warning: group ian does not exist - using root warning: user ian does not exist - using root warning: group ian does not exist - using root error: Failed build dependencies: libpython-devel is needed by a-a-p-1.079-1mdk --------------8<--------------8<--------------8<-------------- This looks like an inconsistency in the naming of a package, on SUSE 10.0 I have: --------------8<--------------8<--------------8<-------------- rpm -qi python-devel Name : python-devel Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 2.4.1 Vendor: SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuern berg, Germany Release : 3 Build Date: Tue Sep 13 02:48:40 2005 Install date: Sun Oct 23 20:34:02 2005 Build Host: bizet.suse.de Group : Development/Languages/Python Source RPM: python-2.4.1-3.src.rpm Size : 13912546 License: Artistic License, Other License (s), see package Signature : DSA/SHA1, Tue Sep 13 04:01:07 2005, Key ID a84edae89c800aca Packager : http://www.suse.de/feedback URL : http://www.python.org/ Summary : Include Files and Libraries Mandatory for Building Python Modules. Description : The Python programming language's interpreter can be extended with dynamically loaded extensions and can be embedded in other programs. This package contains header files, a static library, and development tools for building Python modules, extending the Python interpreter or embedding Python in applications. This also includes the Python distutils, which were in the Python package up to version 2.2.2. Authors: -------- Guido van Rossum <guido(a)python.org> Distribution: SUSE LINUX 10.0 (i586) --------------8<--------------8<--------------8<-------------- So it looks like we'll need a: BuildRequires: libpython-devel for Mandriva and BuildRequires: python-devel for SUSE. How can this be done so that it will work on as many rpm using distros as possible? Some info on building packages for openSUSE: http://www.opensuse.org/SUSE_Build_Tutorial Have a nice weekend, Aschwin Marsman -- aschwin(a)marsman.org http://www.marsman.org

1 0

Problems with liblo
by Oliver Bengs 18 Nov '05

18 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello all, I want build dssi-0.9.1, it is no Problem with liblo-0.16-5 und liblo-devel-0.16-5 from base, it all compiles and lets install. With liblo-0.22-0.oc2pus.1 and devel it compiles, but when i want install the rpm comes this message: error: Failed dependencies: liblo.so.0 is needed by dssi-0.9.1-0.jacklab.1 rpm -ql liblo give me this: /usr/lib/liblo.so.0 /usr/lib/liblo.so.0.5.0 /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/AUTHORS /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/COPYING /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/ChangeLog /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/INSTALL /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/NEWS /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/README /usr/share/doc/packages/liblo/TODO liblo.so.0 is a symlink to /usr/lib/liblo.so.0.5.0 in the rpm from base was the symlink to liblo.so.0.4.0 and it fails not. What can i do? Olli -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDe5ZLj/glEAdJRAMRAkeGAJ4nvJ91XdfVz4cxyF8r7L8OW0X1VgCgiDMn ZJYAaqvqImk7Mt8RwH10I00= =FyPR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 3

Handbrake
by Marcel Hilzinger 18 Nov '05

18 Nov '05

I had a look at this DVDRip tool (initially from BeOS). But I couldn't even compile it. Perhaps one of you can have a look at it and figure out, how to make an rpm without including a52dec, ffmpeg, etc: http://handbrake.m0k.org/ Thanks -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Marcel Hilzinger Linux New Media AG Süskindstr. 4 D-81929 München Tel: +49 (89) 99 34 11 0 Fax: +49 (89) 99 34 11 99

1 0

tellico problems
by Damian Mihai Liviu 18 Nov '05

18 Nov '05

Hi, I want to create a package for tellico 1.0.3 because SUSE provides only 0.13.8. I've took the spec file and the dif from the SUSE's package and modified them for a little. The only thing modified in the spec file is the version. The dif file is here: --- tellico-1.0.3.dif: --- Makefile.am +++ Makefile.am 2005/07/20 13:58:47 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ ####### kdevelop will overwrite this part!!! (begin)########## -SUBDIRS = src po doc icons xslt admin +SUBDIRS = src po doc icons xslt EXTRA_DIST = COPYING ChangeLog INSTALL README TODO tellico.lsm tellico.spec tellico.dtd x-tellico.desktop configure.in.in AUTHORS NEWS tellico.tips tellico.desktop tellico-rename.upd --- Since I'm not a programmer I took this file from the 0.13.8 SRPM and removed all the lines, except these. When the y2pmbuild compiles the source I get this errors: ------ ./src/translators/libtranslators.a(bibteximporter.o): In function `~BibtexImporter': /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:33: undefined reference to `bt_cleanup' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:33: undefined reference to `bt_cleanup' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:33: undefined reference to `bt_cleanup' ./src/translators/libtranslators.a(bibteximporter.o): In function `Tellico::Import::BibtexImporter::parseText(QString const&)': /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:156: undefined reference to `bt_set_stringopts' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:157: undefined reference to `bt_set_stringopts' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:179: undefined reference to `bt_parse_entry_s' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:193: undefined reference to `bt_parse_entry_s' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:181: undefined reference to `bt_entry_metatype' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:183: undefined reference to `bt_next_field' ./src/translators/libtranslators.a(bibteximporter.o): In function `Tellico::Import::BibtexImporter::collection()': /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:62: undefined reference to `bt_entry_metatype' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:70: undefined reference to `bt_entry_metatype' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:79: undefined reference to `bt_entry_metatype' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:86: undefined reference to `bt_entry_type' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:91: undefined reference to `bt_entry_key' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:97: undefined reference to `bt_next_field' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:105: undefined reference to `bt_next_value' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:63: undefined reference to `bt_get_text' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:140: undefined reference to `bt_free_ast' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:72: undefined reference to `bt_next_field' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:75: undefined reference to `bt_macro_text' ./src/translators/libtranslators.a(bibteximporter.o): In function `BibtexImporter': /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:29: undefined reference to `bt_initialize' /usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3/src/translators/bibteximporter.cpp:29: undefined reference to `bt_initialize' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Error creating ./src/tellico. Exit status 1. makeobj[0]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/packages/BUILD/tellico-1.0.3' error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.86206 (%build) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.86206 (%build) ------ Can someone help me with a patch or some hints? If I let the patch from 0.13.8 untouched I get errors when the patch is applied. If I don't apply the patch, after %configure I get unsermake is giving me an error about missing Makefile from the admin/ dir. If I use update_admin --no-unsermake I also get some errors (I don't remember what errors but I think the errors were about bt_initialize). Any idea? Cheers, -- Damian Mihai Liviu Mobile: +40 741 226993; Fax: +1 347-632-4117 Phone : +1 360-526-6441; +1 347-632-4117; +44 0870-3403339 URL: http://liviudm.blogspot.com

3 3

gcc cannot create executables
by Damian Mihai Liviu 16 Nov '05

16 Nov '05

Hi, I'm trying to build a hardened toolchain for my SESUSE project. I took gcc-4.1 from Factory because it includes SSP and built the RPMS, created a repository with this and add it to Yast Installation Sources. y2pmbuild is installing it correctly but it doesn't want to install gettext-devel. I took binutils and gettext and packaged them and everything is installing fine, but I get the following error: checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables How should I solve this? These are the version used: gcc-4.1.0_20051104-3.SESUSE.1.i586.rpm, binutils-2.16.91.0.2-8.SESUSE.1.i586.rpm, gettext-0.14.3-6.SESUSE.1.i586.rpm. The spec are almost unmodified. I only added Packager: and a Changelog entry and changed the Release:. Cheers, -- Damian Mihai Liviu Mobile: +40 741 226993; Fax: +1 347-632-4117 Phone : +1 360-526-6441; +1 347-632-4117; +44 0870-3403339 URL: http://liviudm.blogspot.com

4 9

Updated package aqbanking
by Rauch Christian 14 Nov '05

14 Nov '05

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Updated package 'aqbanking' (http://www.aquamaniac.de/aqbanking/) to 1.6.1 Should be available by now on [1]. [1] ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/misc/suser-crauch/ Christian Rauch -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDeEnxayhvFxrDZlkRAlIWAJ4kH09wMH+x3MKoM4v2wqeAwM6IngCfUKG+ hnzPx2gEPLJ6u1aP24hHUTk= =Cgnx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

gcc-3.4.4 + ssp spec
by Damian Mihai Liviu 14 Nov '05

14 Nov '05

Hello, If there is someone here with enough time to help me create a spec for gcc-3.4.4 with ssp please contact me via e-mail or IM: e-mail: this e-mail ;-) Yahoo: liviudm_cisco ICQ: 311535578 Jabber: liviudm(a)jabber.org Cheers, -- Damian Mihai Liviu Mobile: +40 741 226993; Fax: +1 347-632-4117 Phone : +1 360-526-6441; +1 347-632-4117; +44 0870-3403339 URL: http://liviudm.blogspot.com

2 2

Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA XML)
by Karl Eichwalder 13 Nov '05

13 Nov '05

Do you think it is worth adding the Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA XML) to SUSE Linux? DITA XML is a topic oriented way of managing documentation. It is a standard driven by IBM and accepted by OASIS. For more info, see http://xml.coverpages.org/dita.html

2 2