November 2006 - openSUSE Packaging - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[opensuse-packaging] submitting packages for Open SuSE
by Nadia Derbey 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

Hi, I have a set of packages I'd like to submit for inclusion into Open SuSE. Can somebody tell me what is the process? Is there a packagew review phase (as it is done for Fedora Extras)? Or may be there's a wiki page I missed somewhere? Regards, Nadia --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

3 4

[opensuse-packaging] Hint needed
by Nadia Derbey 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

Hi, After building my packages using rpmbuild, solving all the rpmlint complaints, I have tried to build my packages using build. Everything worked fine, but I'd like to know if it is 'legal' to copy the $HOME/.rpmmacros into the BUILD_ROOT directory. Actually, I'd like rpmbuild (the one called by build) to take into account all the macros I've set to enable signing the package (%_signature, %_gpg_path, %_gpg_name, %_gpgbin), as well as the %packager macro. When I used to call rpmbuild alone, all these macros were set in $HOME/.rpmmacros, and then I called rpmbuild -ba --sign <my_spec_file> Now I'd like to call build with BUILD_RPM_BUILD_STAGE="-ba --sign" Or may be is this a wrong method? Anybody can help? Regards, Nadia --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

6 12

Re: [opensuse-packaging] Hint needed
by Dominique Leuenberger 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

>>> Reply on 27-11-2006 11:58:48 <<< > Marcus Rueckert schrieb: > > On 2006-11-27 10:26:41 +0100, Nadia Derbey wrote: > >> I use .rpmmacros to set the %packager and what is needed for the gpg > > >> signature (otherwise rpmlint complains about it :-( ). > >> So, may be my question should have been the following: > >> How to sign packages when they are built using build (or lbuild). > > > > after you have build the packages for all architectures/distros you > call > > > > rpm --addsign */*.rpm > > > > this saves you from typing your passphrase multiple times and you can > > sign all of them in one go. > > > > rpm --resign might be nice too. it removes all other signatures > before > > adding your own. > > There is no difference between --addsign and --resign. RPMs cannot have > more than one signature, so --addsign removes all the other signature, > too. That's not exactly what Maximum RPM tells you: http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-pgp-signing-packages.html They even have a specific scenario when more than one sig is wished/wanted/required. Dominique --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

2 1

Re: [opensuse-packaging] BuildScript questions
by Dominique Leuenberger 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

>>> Reply on 27-11-2006 10:59:49 <<< > Dominique Leuenberger wrote: > > I'm using the build-script from Novell, which works quiet well. (the > > one from the BuildService) > > I'm running it on a x86-64 SUSE Linux 10.1 box for the moment. > > > > I have a directory setup of > > > > /var > > | /buildrpms > > | | /SL-10.2 > > | | | x86_64 > > | | | i586 > > | | /SL-10.1 > > | | | x86_64 > > | | | i586 > > | | /SL-10.0 > > | | | x86_64 > > | | | i586 > > > > and I switch base distro using the --rpms parameter. > > > > So basically, I would like to decide to build a package for 10.1 > > x86-64, I do: > > > > build --rpms=/var/buildrpms/SL-10.1 --arch=x86_64 specfile.spec > > and if I decide for 10.1 i586, I do > > build --rpms=/var/buildrpms/SL-10.1 --arch=i586 specfile.spec > > > > Doing so seems to correctly define the architecture of the installed > > rpms in the build root, but the resulting ELF binaries, in either of > > these calls, result in being 64bit applications. > > > > Is my idea of the mainusage of the build script wrong or is it just > my > > usage of it? > > Thanks for some help on this, > > I guess it's solved if you start build with "linux32 build ..." > If that's considered to be a hack or an official supported feature I > don't know. > It's also the way it's done within osc IMHO. > > Wolfgang Wolfgang, Thanks for that trick/official hack or whatever.. as long as it helps... I'll try to integrate this this evening in my build script wrapped around and hopefully it works.. I'll let you know. Dominique --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] BuildScript questions
by Dominique Leuenberger 27 Nov '06

27 Nov '06

Hi, I'm using the build-script from Novell, which works quiet well. (the one from the BuildService) I'm running it on a x86-64 SUSE Linux 10.1 box for the moment. I have a directory setup of /var | /buildrpms | | /SL-10.2 | | | x86_64 | | | i586 | | /SL-10.1 | | | x86_64 | | | i586 | | /SL-10.0 | | | x86_64 | | | i586 and I switch base distro using the --rpms parameter. So basically, I would like to decide to build a package for 10.1 x86-64, I do: build --rpms=/var/buildrpms/SL-10.1 --arch=x86_64 specfile.spec and if I decide for 10.1 i586, I do build --rpms=/var/buildrpms/SL-10.1 --arch=i586 specfile.spec Doing so seems to correctly define the architecture of the installed rpms in the build root, but the resulting ELF binaries, in either of these calls, result in being 64bit applications. Is my idea of the mainusage of the build script wrong or is it just my usage of it? Thanks for some help on this, Dominique --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-packaging] y2pmbuild and "# neededforbuild"
by Nadia Derbey 23 Nov '06

23 Nov '06

Hi, I was reading the script /usr/bin/y2pmbuild (I wanted to figure out what's the difference between calling y2pmbuild and just an rpmbuild), and I found the following: in getneededforbuild(), I couldn't find the place where the line starting with "# needeforbuild" is analyzed (http://forgeftp.novell.com//library/SUSE%20Package%20Conventions/spc.html#s…) The line "# usedforbuild" is analyzed instead, while it is supposed to be obsolete (http://forgeftp.novell.com//library/SUSE%20Package%20Conventions/spc.html#s…) I'm using y2pmsh-2.13.3-6 (on SuSE Linux 10.1). May be it is not the good one to use to be in phase with the SuSE package conventions? Regards, Nadia --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

3 7

[opensuse-packaging] [SLE] Automatic updates from own repo
by Anders Norrbring 21 Nov '06

21 Nov '06

I just don't get it.. I've set up my own repositary, signed it, and imported the key to YaST. Still, every package installed from it is marked as "locked" and doesn't update automatically. How do I get around that? I don't want to auto-update "interactive" patches since it'll update kernels which in turn would render some apps dead in the water util I take care of it manually. -- Anders Norrbring Norrbring Consulting

2 2

[opensuse-packaging] No libstdc++.la on 10.2
by Pascal Bleser 16 Nov '06

16 Nov '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Seems someone decided to remove /usr/%{_lib}/libstdc++.la on 10.2... ? At least it's not in any of the following packages: # rpm -qa | grep libstdc++ libstdc++41-4.1.2_20061018-4 libstdc++41-32bit-4.1.2_20061018-4 compat-libstdc++-5.0.7-33 libstdc++-devel-4.1.3-18 libstdc++41-devel-4.1.2_20061018-4 # rpm -ql libstdc++41-4.1.2_20061018-4 | grep "\.la" # rpm -ql libstdc++41-32bit-4.1.2_20061018-4 | grep "\.la" # rpm -ql compat-libstdc++-5.0.7-33 | grep "\.la" # rpm -ql libstdc++-devel-4.1.3-18 | grep "\.la" # rpm -ql libstdc++41-devel-4.1.2_20061018-4 | grep "\.la" # rpm -ql libstdc++41-devel-4.1.2_20061018-4 | grep "\.la" Any particular reason ? Is it somewhere else ? I sure hope it wasn't "optimized" away because it breaks other packages that need that .la :\ If it's not somewhere else, I'll file a (major) bug. 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 v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFQS8tr3NMWliFcXcRAtcrAJwKVyZQcRJaLysU4/0XF1Ym4rJesgCfQpYs P2jv7/TDFQDKCuJc9H7AiBk= =JrYQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

5 6

[opensuse-packaging] Usage of the Build-Script
by Dominique Leuenberger 15 Nov '06

15 Nov '06

Hi, I'm preparing my machine to install different packages, for different SuSE Versions / different Archs. What I did so far: I created directories: /var/build/build_rpms/10.0 /var/build/build_rpms/10.1 /var/build/build_rpms/Factory all of them contain i586, noarch an x86-64 (of the respective versions) using build, I do build --rpms=/var/build/build_rpms/10.0 if I compile for 10.0 .../10.1 for 10.1 and so forth But I'm not yet sure about the ARCH to select / build. Is this done via --arch? (I guess so, but the help text more describes it as it's selecting from RPMs than for building this arch). so could I for example give build --rpms=/var/build/build_rpms/10.0 --arch=x86-64 specfile.spec to build an x86-64 for SuSE 10 and build --rpms=/var/build/build_rpms/10.0 --arch=i586 specfile.spec to build an i586 rpm for Suse 10? Or is there something else to do? Dominique

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] Clean up RPM Groups
by Lars Rupp 14 Nov '06

14 Nov '06

Hi all During installation of Beta2, I found packages in RPM Groups, I never expected them to be. For example: perl-Apache-AuthCookie => Development/Languages/Perl perl-SVN-Simple => Development/Languages/Perl vs. perl-SOAP-Lite => Development/Libraries/Perl perl-Apache-AuthNetLDAP => Development/Libraries/Perl Referring to the SUSE Package Conventions: http://developer.novell.com/wiki/index.php/SUSE_Package_Conventions "The group Development/Languages is intended for tools that are useful or even necessary for developing in a particular programming language. This is the right place for compilers, interpreters, and programming language–dependent tools." [...] "The group Development/Libraries is intended for packages that allow developing with a library. [...] Here, developers should ﬁnd all available libraries that can be used in more projects." So in summary for me: We should use ONE Group for Perl-Modules and ONE Group for packages that extend the compiler of a language. But this doesn't only happen to Perl - nearly all other programming languages are affected. It's very easy to check this yourself: start "yast2 sw_single &" and have a look at the package groups... As we can't check the correct group automatically at the moment, I'm asking every packager: please have a look at the RPM Group of your package. And adjust it if necessary. Thank you in advance! With kind regards Lars --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] A way to provide gpg key?
by Anders Norrbring 13 Nov '06

13 Nov '06

Is there a way to automatically provide the passkey to gpg and rpmbuild when using the 'build' scripts? Many times I build packages for both i586 and x86_64 and SUSE versions 9.3 -> 10.1 and SLES9 & 10. It would be really nice to automate all the passkey entries so I can run it all in one batch. -- Anders Norrbring Norrbring Consulting

4 10

[opensuse-packaging] Please update packages of libtidy an tidy!
by Sierk Bornemann 12 Nov '06

12 Nov '06

Hello, I am the package maintaner of the openSUSE packages tidy/libtidy, apache2-mod_tidy and w3c-markup-validator. Reading, that openSUSE 10.2 Beta 2 is announced, I want to stress, that until today the factory packages of tidy and its library, libtidy are not up-to-date (they are from 2005!). Since a very while (several month) most recent versions of Tidy and libtidy are available at openSUSE's software repository on http://repos.opensuse.org/Tidy/. Why didn't you take these? Please update your packages in openSUSE factory and use the newer versions out of the Software repository, so that these most recent versions will make it into final openSUSE 10.2. By the way: I want to have your ear, I want to propose, if it won't be attractive also to officially distribute the W3C Markup Validator (http://validator.w3.org/) with openSUSE on a regulary basis. Debian Etch and Fedora Core do this as well, these packages are part of the core distribution. It's in the W3 Consortium interest to spread the validator, having the benefit in mind, that local installed validators can keep the traffic to http://validator.w3.org/ in an affordable shape. The Validator packages are optimized for use on a local host/local net. Most recent W3C Validator packages for openSUSE are available at openSUSE's software repository on http://repos.opensuse.org/validators/ . Recent version is 0.7.3. There will be an official update to version 0.7.4 on Tuesday, november 14th. I have allready prepared packages of this new version, they are waiting to be shipped. I will feed the openSUSE Build System with 0.7.4 sources, as soon as the official W3C valiator website has been updated to this new release. Thanks in advance, Sierk Bornemann Sierk Bornemann | Germany e-mail: sierkb[at]gmx.de, bornemann[at]users.sourceforge.net URL: http://sierkbornemann.de/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

4 3

[opensuse-packaging] How to build for SLES9 SP3?
by Anders Norrbring 12 Nov '06

12 Nov '06

I use the latest build script as adviced by Ludwig last week, but I can't get SLES9 SP3 to build, don't know if it's my mistake, or a script problem. What I did; Copied all SLES9 GA CDs to a directory, added to script - build works. Copied the three SP3 CDs to the same location, overwriting the old versions - build doesn't work. The result for my first try is; "expansion error nothing provides sed needed by sendmail" Then I looked for sed; /iscsi/Archives/SuSE/sles9-i586/sles/suse/src/sed-4.0.9-31.1.src.rpm /iscsi/Archives/SuSE/sles9-i586/sles/suse/i586/sed-4.0.9-31.1.i586.rpm The files are there... -- Anders Norrbring Norrbring Consulting

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] Firestarter and suse 10.1 ATTN: David Bolt
by struth 07 Nov '06

07 Nov '06

I am trying to track down David Bolt through this list as I sa in the archives that he had got suse 10.1 and firestarter to work together. The below is a copy of my post to a forum:- I have been having problems getting Firestarter to work well with 10.1. I have tried the 9.? rpm and it seemed to act as a firewall ok but the events page never had anything in it. So I went to try and install it from source but the config kept telling me that I was missing old gnome files. Is there any advance on the firestarter and 10.1 front? Or can someone point to a better firewall that works fine with 10.1? The YAST one that is included, I can't get to allow specific addresses and I don't really want to learn all about iptables. Thanx for your time, spence

2 1

[opensuse-packaging] Update source breaks it all..
by Anders Norrbring 07 Nov '06

07 Nov '06

I just added a source for updates, mirrored locally and I've run createrepo on the dir. So, I added it in the config like this: url_suse="file:/iscsi/Archives/SuSE/inst_source/10.1" url_updates="file:/iscsi/Archives/SuSE/inst_source/10.1_up" add_sources="suse updates" So, then I tried to do a build, and this came out (hundreds of lines deleted).. root dir set to /store3/build.root.10.1-x86_64 running from system no ATTENTION: this is a one way ticket. Resetting this to true has not effect! initializing installation sources ... initializing target ... rebuilding RPM database ..................................................... ok reading RPM database ........................................................ ok Known sources: 0: [x] SUSE Linux 10.1 (file:/iscsi/Archives/SuSE/inst_source/10.1) 1: [x] file:/iscsi/Archives/SuSE/inst_source/10.1_up/ (file:/iscsi/Archives/SuSE/inst_source/10.1_up) [autorefresh] debug disabled 90 packages to install unresolvable dependencies: *** Conflicts *** Name: /bin/sh(*) Edition: EDITION-UNSPEC Referers: aaa_base-10.1-41 requires /bin/sh, Not-Available: any Name: /bin/bash(*) Edition: EDITION-UNSPEC Referers: aaa_base-10.1-41 requires /bin/bash, bind-utils-9.3.2-17 requires /bin/bash, groff-1.18.1.1-29 requires /bin/bash, less-394-12 requires /bin/bash, module-init-tools-3. 2.2-32.13 requires /bin/bash, perl-5.8.8-12 requires /bin/bash, pwdutils-3.0.7.1-17 requires /bin/bash, rpm-4.4.2-43.4 requires /bin/bash, util-linux-2.12r-35 requires /bin/bash Not-Available: any Ideas please.... -- Anders Norrbring Norrbring Consulting

4 16

[opensuse-packaging] Different Target-Distributions
by Dominique Leuenberger 07 Nov '06

07 Nov '06

hi, I'm packaging some of my RPMs in the buildService, others I can't put there for different reasons. For the latter, I'm using the build sh Script from openSUSE BS. Is there something like a DIST-TARGET to be defined or does this solely depend on the RPMs I offer it for the installation? ($BUILD_RPMS)? osc offers a feature like this, but I guess osc is not usable without putting the packages in the BS repositories, right? Thanks Dominique

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] Ubuntu Packages
by Dominique Leuenberger 01 Nov '06

01 Nov '06

Hi everybody, I know, I'm on the absolutely wrong mailinglist for the question, but OTOH, not that wrong: I am using a lot the build - script from openSUSE:Tools to create RPMs lately, mainly to distribute several softs not in the BS. Now, a friend asked me if I could also create a package for his Ubuntu Installation... Ubunut, being Debian based, uses .DEB - Packages. Is there an easy way for me to do this? Best would be by the possibility of continue to use the build script and the .spec files, as I'm quiet familiar with this by now. Or will I have to get some completely new environment to get this finally up and running for him? Regards, Dominique

1 0