openSUSE Packaging May 2006

packaging@lists.opensuse.org

28 participants
17 discussions

Secure/signed installation sources woes
by Pascal Bleser 13 Jun '06

13 Jun '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Trying to add signatures to my (yast2) RPM repository for 10.1. http://en.opensuse.org/Secure_Installation_Sources A couple of unclear things in there I'd like to poke on. ========= "When YaST detects an installation source it checks if the file "products" is there, and then checks if it is signed with a known key. If it is not signed at all or with an unknown key, or if the key is on the media, but not trusted (yet), the user will be asked what to do." "The key is usually also on the installation media as /gpg-pubkey-9c800aca-40d8063e.asc" What it doesn't say clearly is where/how YaST2 will try to fetch the armored/exported key in order to propose importing it. I assume it uses whatever is defined in "content" using the "KEY" tag (see below). Correct ? ========= "The "content" file is signed in the same manner as the "products" file, so there is a "content.key" (usually, but not necessarily the same as "products.key")." Those "content.key"/"products.key" files are not mentioned anywhere else. Are those copies of the ASCII-armored, exported GPG key ? ========= "META keys are added for all files in the directory named in the key DESCRDIR" So in "content" I should have something like: ... DESCRDIR setup/descr KEY SHA1 33ad20fe228350dc4e0f0cd7967460c31266af36 gpg-pubkey-guru.asc META SHA1 4baafd9998ea4e20245f82e507c6db6b723f4597 packages META SHA1 965ba5faeea815d41ba308ffd193b78505b26c1c directory.yast META SHA1 4565f769ae573f89dddbf2eef1357b59a88ad1df packages.DU META SHA1 c53400cdb9e16ac0d9add587585fc77c86f132c5 packages.en Correct ? ========= "Before YaST uses any file from DESCRDIR it will look up the entry in "content". This entry is currently a SHA1 checksum followed by the package name. This may change to a SHA256 checksum." A "package" name ? I suppose what is meant here is "file" name. Is it ? ========= "The next step in the chain is the file "packages" in DESCRDIR. If you are familiar with its syntax you will see that we added a new tag there, too, right after the "Pgk:" tag. Here is an example of the first two lines of the entry for the default kernel: =Pkg: kernel-default 2.6.16 13 i586 =Cks: SHA1 8c8eb2b605e1d626c22bea8dd0c3b05885432b16 Again we have a SHA1 checksum." Maybe it should be mentioned that one must use create_package_descr from 10.1 or Factory (I only checked the one from autoyast2-2.13.59.tar.bz2) What about older versions ? If I use create_package_descr from 10.1/Factory, that adds those =Cks: tags into the "packages" file, can I also use it to generate "packages" for, say, 10.0/9.3/9.2/9.1 ? Or will YaST2 on 10.0 and older bark, saying that it does not know anything about the "=Cks:" tag ? 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) iD8DBQFEdcqur3NMWliFcXcRAipAAJ9zpDlujVLHfvUyGqzVevt23Y3fUgCfcBvf /6CbxUT9RXz8ZjXc+Kor0/Q= =nzgd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

ladspa
by Oliver Bengs 30 May '06

30 May '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I have compailed MusE for SuSE 10.1. Compile works fine but at start i become the follow error message: Unabel to find ladspa_descriptor() function in plugin library file "/usr/lib/ladspa/sine.so":/usr/lub/sine.so: undefined symbol: ladspa_descriptor. I think OK a problem with ladspa. I load the ladspa-1.12.20050216-7.src.rpm and tried to recompile it. ladspa has libselinux as BuildRequire, there is no libselinux in 10.1? Then i removed libselinux as BuildRequire. Now the compile breaks with c++ -O2 -g -m32 -march=i586 -mtune=i686 -fmessage-length=0 - -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 - fPIC -I. -o plugins/sine.o -c plugins/sine.cpp plugins/sine.cpp: In constructor ‘StartupShutdownHandler::StartupShutdownHandler ()’: plugins/sine.cpp:266: error: ‘instantiateSineOscillator’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:268: error: ‘connectPortToSineOscillator’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:270: error: ‘activateSineOscillator’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:278: error: ‘cleanupSineOscillator’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:291: error: ‘runSineOscillator_FreqAudio_AmpAudio’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:303: error: ‘runSineOscillator_FreqAudio_AmpCtrl’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:315: error: ‘runSineOscillator_FreqCtrl_AmpAudio’ was not declared in this scope plugins/sine.cpp:327: error: ‘runSineOscillator_FreqCtrl_AmpCtrl’ was not declared in this scope Anyone an idea Why i can't rebuild it? Oliver Bengs -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEeyTNj/glEAdJRAMRAgs7AJ9pqXGn4rIwoGMVl4uyperjYh4SzwCggO8Q FSL9JPMu+c7YBMyX+7Ze++0= =DmFP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Howto install IBM Java2 sdk package
by doug arro 26 May '06

26 May '06

Hi, I am new to SUSE. My system is OpenSUSE 10.1 The YaST tool only shows the j2sdk packages from SUN, but none from IBM. Can I download the rpm from the IBM website and install it with YaST? Just wondering what is the best way to install 3rd party rpms like this in OpenSUSE. Doug __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

makefile impact specfile?
by Marc Collin 24 May '06

24 May '06

hi i would like to know if the makefile can have an impact on the specfile? i create a specfile step by step BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version} %description spca5xx video for linux (v4l) driver, providing support for webcams and digital cameras based on the spca5xx range of chips manufactured by SunPlus Sonix Z-star Vimicro Conexant Etoms Transvision Mars-Semi Pixart. %prep %setup %build make build --rpms /opt/dvd_suse return /bin/chgrp -Rhf root . + /bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . + exit 0 Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.56470 + umask 022 + cd /usr/src/packages/BUILD + /bin/rm -rf /var/tmp/spca5xx-20060501 ++ dirname /var/tmp/spca5xx-20060501 + /bin/mkdir -p /var/tmp + /bin/mkdir /var/tmp/spca5xx-20060501 + cd spca5xx-20060501 + make Building SPCA5XX driver for 2.5/2.6 kernel. Remember: you must have read/write access to your kernel source tree. make -C /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build SUBDIRS=/usr/src/packages/BUILD/spca5xx-20060501 CC=cc modules make: *** /lib/modules/2.6.16.13-4-default/build: No such file or directory. Stop. make: *** [default] Error 2 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.56470 (%build) not sure but with this message, the build don't seem to take the right folder.... thanks

4 5

Patch name and comments proposal
by Pavel Nemec 22 May '06

22 May '06

We are working on patch naming for SUSE Package Conventions (http://forgeftp.novell.com//library/SUSE%20Package%20Conventions/spc.html) This is proposal and comments from community are welcome. Reasons/ motivations: why we need this: ------------------------------------------------------- - backup maintainers - team working on bug fixing -> unified way of patching - tracking changes in patch, tracking mainstream patches 1. Patch Name ----------------------- 1.1 Suffix ------------ We need to choose unified suffix for patch name. Commonly used suffixes are: "patch, diff, dif" Suffix "Patch" and "Diff" are most commonly used. There is no rational reason why one "Patch" or "Diff" should NOT be used. "Diff" suffix is associated with shared mime info Proposal: - use "patch" suffix, do not rename old patches. Do not use "dif" suffix any more. 1.2 Naming --------------- Name of package should be very intuitive and should tell maintainer what this patch actually fix. Name of patch should consist of: Name, Number, Mnemonic hint 1.2.1 Name --------------- There is two way for choose patch name, use package name, or use source name. There are packages with more than one source in package. Proposal: - use name of source which patch is apply to. Patch should not fix files from different source. - if is not possible use name of source, use name of package instead. 1.2.2 Number ------------------ Number as version of source or package is heavily used in patch name. This could confuse new maintainer because it suggest that patch is version dependent. If this package is not version dependent and package is updated to new version, all patch had to be updated. In SUSE, there are many packages which contains patch, which are not sent to upstream, because they fix SUSE specific problems. Proposal: - use no number at all for patch which are not meant to be send in upstream (SUSE specific, temporary distribution dependent fix ....) - use number for patch which are only for this version of package (source), this patch should be sent to upstream. This number should be changed when updating to new version if we still expect this patch to be accepted by upstream. If no, number should be removed from this patch. 1.2.3 Mnemonic hint --------------------------- Mnemonic hint should tell (together with changelog) what this patch fix. There are only common hints how to do useful hints. Proposal: - use '-' for separate section in name and '_' for separating words e.g.: gcc-really_useful.patch enlightenment-gcc-error.patch lftp-compat-mode.patch graphviz-fix_swig_template.patch - if fixed problem could not be easily hinted by short name, you can use bugzilla number, or security bug reference ID (like CVE, PMASA). We could consider creating table of commonly used hints. e.g.: CVE-2005-3353.patch PMASA-2005-6.patch php-5.1.2-phpbug-36208.patch - there are patch which fix problem which is caused by another part of system ( broken library, autobuild....). Patch name should reflex this. We propose to use buildfix/temporaryfix/runfix for such patch. This patch should be removed as soon as possible (probably when updating to new version) buildfix - if this package could be builded, this patch could be safely removed. runfix - if this package could be runed without this patch, this patch could be safely removed. temporaryfix - all other temporary fix. 2. Changelog ------------------ All changes in package (adding/removing patch, changing spec file ...) should be mentioned in changelog. From name of patch changelog and comments in patch should be clear what change was made. Proposal: - mention add or remove patch in changelog e.g. [ ...] - added patch -gcc-error.patch - use number of bug from bugzilla., Name of bugzilla should be used if it is not obvious e.g. fixed gcc error [#32423] fixed gcc error, openoffice [#3224324] - use reference to security ID in changelog e.g. - fixed completely broken SplTempFileObject [php#37257] - if fix is more complicated, additional info in header of patch file should be present! - additional info in patch should be present also in patch which will be presented in package for long time (program is not developed any longer...) 3. Patch in specfile ------------------------- Main problem with patch in specfile is numbering. When patches are added they have increasing number. Php example: Patch1: php5-config.patch Patch2: php5-phpize.patch Patch3: php5-apache_sapi_install.patch Patch4: php5-php-config.patch Patch5: php-%{version}-include_path.patch [ ... snip, there are about 51 patches] When patch is removed, there are hole in specfile, which could look ugly. But renumbering is time consuming. There is possible to use unused number, but adding position in spec file should be preserved. Example Patch1: php5-config.patch Patch3: php5-apache_sapi_install.patch Patch4: php5-php-config.patch Patch5: php-%{version}-include_path.patch Patch2: php5-new.patch When patch is commented in spec file and not deleted, there should be comment, explaining this. e.g. # FIXME: This patch should be backported. #%patch2 # Uncomment this patch, if automake fails. #%patch3 Comment should be also used, if patch is used differently than normal. e.g. (blender) Patch1: po.patch Patch2: blender-home-to-datadir.patch # patch is applied only on x86-64 Patch5: Scons.patch [...] 4. Common advise ------------------------- - when fixing package, try to keep style convention set by author of this package (if it is still any) e.g. some one write bugzilla number as "#234345", [#33453453], (#2342342) - do not overwrite changelogs - preserve time stamps of file you do not modify. -- Pavel Nemec package-maintainer http://en.opensuse.org/Czech_Packagers_Team --------------------------------------------------------------------- SuSE CR, s.r.o. e-mail: pnemec(a)suse.cz Drahobejlova 27 tel:+420 2 9654 2373 190 00 Praha 9 fax:+420 2 9654 2374 Ceska republika http://www.suse.cz

5 6

Re: Create spec file
by Marc Collin 22 May '06

22 May '06

> Hi, > > On Monday, May 22, 2006 at 01:44:39, Marc Collin wrote: > >> i begin to create rpm for suse >> >> configure: error: IMWheel depends on the X11 libraries! >> >> i don't understand why it don't get the X11 librairies, i copied all the >> dvd in /opt/dvd_suse > > You are probably missing BuildRequires to xorg-x11-libs and > xorg-x11-devel > > Henne > ya know that compile i read this tutorial http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm1/ i get: build --rpms /opt/dvd_suse error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/X11/bin/imwheel /usr/local/man/man1/imwheel.1.gz i tried to add in the spec file: %config(noreplace) /etc/imwheelrc /usr/X11R6/bin/imwheel %attr(0755, root, root) %{prefix}/bin/imwheel %{prefix}/man/man1/imwheel.1x.bz2 but i get RPM build errors: File not found: /var/tmp/imwheel-1.0.0pre12-build/etc/imwheelrc File not found: /var/tmp/imwheel-1.0.0pre12-build/usr/X11R6/bin/imwheel linux64:/usr/src/packages/SOURCES/imwheel # build --rpms /opt/dvd_suse logging output to /var/tmp/build-root/.build.log... ---- www.laboiteaprog.com

3 10

create spec file
by Marc Collin 22 May '06

22 May '06

hi i begin to create rpm for suse i installed build i don't find a good tutorial about specfile in my spec file i have: %define prefix /usr/X11 ... ... %prep rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %setup %build ./configure make all %install mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/bin $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/man/man1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/etc /usr/bin/install -c -d -o root -g root -m 0755 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/bin /usr/bin/install -c -o root -g root -m 0755 imwheel $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/bin/imwheel /usr/bin/install -c -d -o root -g root -m 0755 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/man/man1 /usr/bin/install -c -o root -g root -m 0644 imwheel.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/man/man1/imwheel.1x %{bz2} -9 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/man/man1/imwheel.1x /usr/bin/install -c -d -o root -g root -m 0755 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{cfg} /usr/bin/install -c -o root -g root -m 0644 imwheelrc $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{cfg}/imwheelrc when i do: /usr/src/packages/SOURCES/imwheel # build --rpms /opt/dvd_suse/ i get: hecking where the pid file goes... /tmp checking if we suid imwheel at install... no checking if we use the included getopts... no checking if we build mdetect... no checking if we build mdump... no checking if we build extras... no checking for gpm-1.19.3/gpm.c... no checking if we build gpm-imwheel... no checking for X... no checking for XCreateWindow in -lX11... no configure: error: IMWheel depends on the X11 libraries! linux64:/usr/src/packages/SOURCES/imwheel # error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.84858 (%build) i don't understand why it don't get the X11 librairies, i copied all the dvd in /opt/dvd_suse if i use only the source ./configure make all work without problem thank -- www.laboiteaprog.com

2 1

dropping and renaming plan for GNOME1 (GTK1)
by Stanislav Brabec 19 May '06

19 May '06

Hallo. After four years after GNOME2/GTK2 release, the last "killer" application - gnucash, will be finally ported to GNOME2. So we are ready to drop GNOME1 from SuSE Linux. There is a proposal of the dropping plan: Phase 1 (August 2003): Drop everything not needed for gnucash 1, rename foo2 to foo, if applicable. Status: Done Phase 2 (May 2006): Drop everything except core GNOME1. Status: Done Packages for dropping: bonobo control-center gconf gnome-print gnome-spell gnome-vfs gtkhtml oaf Affected packages: none Phase 3 (May 2006): Think about robust naming scheme of packages, where can coexist in more major versions without confusion and often renaming. See below for discussion summary. Phase 4 (near future): Drop core GNOME1. Status: Little work needed Packages for dropping: libglade libxml orbit gnome-libs Affected packages: loki_setup, loki_update (installer) Proposed solution: http://www.icculus.org/loki_setup/ frontline (frontend for autotrace) Proposed solution: drop coriander (IEEE-1394 Digital Camera Controller) Proposed solution: Replace, drop or port soundtracker (sound tracker) Proposed solution: Replace, drop or port bombermaze (game) Proposed solution: Replace or drop gdk-pixbuf (image library) Proposed solution: do not package GNOME1 extension perl-Gtk-Perl (perl bindings) Proposed solution: do not package GNOME1 bindings unixODBC-gui-gtk Proposed solution: do not package GNOME1 interface and popular third party ogle (DVD player) Phase 5 (sometimes in future): Drop GTK1. Status: A lot of work needed Packages for dropping: gtk, glib, gdk-pixbuf, gtk-engines imlib Affected packages: ami gal gau xmms-jack evms-gui pcsx surf xmms xzgv xmms-gnome2 winetools flac-xmms fvwm2 gqcam smpeg-gtv swami bidwatcher loki_uninstall powertweak-gtk python-xmms wmakerconf Xdialog manedit perl-Xmms WindowMaker-applets sylpheed-claws amarok-xmms ardour gbuffy gentoo squaroid gtkzip nicolatter glchess kanji-lookup pcpmon perl-Gtk-Perl alsaplayer TeX-Guy unison procmeter usbview xdelta xmorph sipset xlogmastergoom2k4 xmms-plugins xarchon and popular third party mplayer Proposed solution: Use gtk1-compat-devel (and extend it to cover more), drop, port, turn different frontend instead of GTK1, if available. Naming schemas: Desired properties: - only rename if absolutely not avoidable - use same name as upstream if possible - we can only have one package with an identical name Possible naming schemes: 1) mainline stable without number, old branches with number. Advantage: - use same name as upstream if possible for the head version Problems: - BuildRequires must not use package name but some feature virtual - The moment, when devel branch becomes stable, needs ugly renames - Will cause undefined RPM dependencies Result: Probably not acceptable 2) keep old branch as is and add suffix for new one Advantage: - simple Problems: - having branch number for half of packages is irritating. - additional rename is also not comfortable Result: Confusing use of branch numbers 3) keep old branch as is and add suffix for new one. Rename back, when old branch is dropped (It's the actually used approach.) Advantage: - simple Problem: - having branch number for half of packages is irritating. - many package renames Result: Current solution, ugly, partially confusing use of branch numbers 4) all branches with numbers deduced from, say .pc files names (maybe with dots and trailing zeroes removed). Advantage: - never rename package which does not change API Problems: - packages has names different from upstream - most packages will have untrivial name and version, e. g. gnome-vfs-2.0-2.12.3 (resp. gnome-vfs2-2.12.3) and also gtkmm24-2.8.2. Result: Needs to think twice before using this scheme. 5) ??? -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SuSE CR, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec(a)suse.cz Drahobejlova 27 tel: +420 296 542 382 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 296 542 374 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/

1 0

Packaging style guidelines: %configure, %optflags, %buildroot etc.
by andreas.hanke＠gmx-topmail.de 19 May '06

19 May '06

Hi, are there any generic packaging "style" guidelines for SUSE Linux packages? More precisely, I have the following questions: - Is %buildroot preferred over $RPM_BUILD_ROOT? I'm asking because I see more and more packages switching from $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to %buildroot, but this macro is an implementation detail according to Red Hat's rpm-list: http://www.redhat.com/archives/rpm-list/2002-July/msg00121.html The environment variable is the documented thing. The same is the case with %optflags vs. $RPM_OPT_FLAGS IIRC. - Is %configure preferred over ./configure? IIRC until recently, no package in the distro used it and everything worked well without it. I'm asking that because %configure IMHO sucks terribly. It sets questionable values for --libexecdir, --localstatedir and --sharedstatedir for packages whose prefix is /usr, requires even more macros to be redefined for packages whose prefix is not /usr (/opt/kde3, /opt/gnome and /usr/X11R6 come to mind) and always sets --libdir to %{_prefix}/%{_lib} although it must remain %{_prefix}/lib for some packages. So what's the exact benefit of %configure? It makes some autoconf calls shorter by adding the right options and others longer by adding wrong ones, which have to be corrected manually, so we end up adding options manually in either case. - %optflags / $RPM_OPT_FLAGS again: Are they "nice to have" things or is not using them a bug that should be reported? - run-time and -devel packages Is there a general rule for splitting or not splitting library packages into run-time and -devel subpackages? Is this decided according to the size of a library, the number of header files, other criteria? I'm asking that because IMHO always splitting them is an interesting approach even for tiny packages as it allows third party people to package another version of the same library that has a different SONAME without having to worry about conflicts. The -devel packages would still be clashing in most of such cases, but the run-time packages can be installed in parallel. Andreas Hanke -- Mobile Internet - E-Mail und Internet immer und �berall! GMX zum Mitnehmen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/pocketweb

3 4

FYI: Unresolveable dependencies
by Andreas Schneider 15 May '06

15 May '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I've downloaded the 10.1 tree to compile my Packman packages for 10.1. The problem is there are really strange errors with y2pmbuild. It's a problem with the old packagemanager and rpm package alternatives. BuildRequires: kdebase3-devel unresolvable dependencies: *** Conflicts *** Name: avahi-compat-mDNSResponder Edition: 0.6.5-27 Referers: kdelibs3-3.5.1-47 requires libdns_sd.so()(64bit), kdelibs3-3.5.1-47 requires libdns_sd.so()(64bit) Conflicts-With: mDNSResponder-lib-107.5-8 conflicts with avahi-compat-mDNSResponder, mDNSResponder-lib-107.5-8 conflicts with avahi-compat-mDNSResponder, avahi-compat-mDNSResponder-0.6.5-27 conflicts with mDNSResponder-lib, avahi-compat-mDNSResponder-0.6.5-27 conflicts with mDNSResponder-lib Remove-To-Solve-Conflict: kdebase3-devel, kdelibs3-devel, mDNSResponder-devel, mDNSResponder-lib mDNSResponder-lib and avahi-compat-mDNSResponder provide libdns_sd.so, so you need as BuildRequires BuildRequires: mDNSResponder-lib kdebase3-devel -- andreas - -- http://www.cynapses.org/ - cybernetic synapses -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEZe2Qf94+j/M+P8YRAqJMAJ0dOA7pmA+k+gorpfNEl+tLkkPIAwCfSVLd KeUzSPKUAYL/SA/3n1LSS+Y= =8iQy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

openSUSE Packaging May 2006