Hi!
We did some analysis on how much space is wasted by packages storing the same
file twice (or more). While few packages waste megabytes (only 88 waste more
than 1000Mib), 657 waste more than 20K - which sums up to 703MiB in total.
Impressed? Consider using fdupes in your package.
It's pretty simple: BuildRequire fdupes and then use "%fdupes $RPM_BUILD_ROOT"
in your install section. This will check for duplicated files and make them
hardlink. Just be careful that these duplicated files do not end up in
different subpackages - I haven't tried what rpm does in that case.
But you can also use %fdupes -s, which will create symlinks, which are easier
to grasp for rpm :)
So you can also combine this like this
# create symlinks for my man pages
%fdupes -s $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%_mandir
# create hardline for the rest
%fdupes $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
I also added an rpmlint check that will give an error for the package if it's
wasting more than 20KB (which is basically a random number).
Greetings, Stephan
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hello,
I was compiling Packman packages for PowerPC for more than a year. Then
my PPC machine broke and my first son was born, so I did not have a
machine or time to do it. Now I have a bit more time and a strong X86
machine, so I would like to resume this activity.
I looked at http://en.opensuse.org/Icecream and compiling on machines of
the same architecture works fine. I have now a small cluster of embedded
PPC machines :-)
Of course, the ultimate goal would be to use the X86 monster to compile
PPC packages. My problem is, that it's not clear from the above
mentioned documentation, that which cross-xxx-icecream packages should I
install on X86 and PPC and how I should parameter ICECC_VERSION.
Bye,
CzP
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Good Morning,
I packaged nexuiz for opensuse 10.2/openSuSE:Factory...and I'm calling
for testers for these packages.
Coming from the debian side of life, I used the debian sources for
packaging, with the difference, that the source package isn't divided
into two source packages but one.
The nexuiz version is the latest stable release and it works for me
(tm) ;)
Have fun testing it...if you have any problems, please send me
bugreports to the mentioned communication channels in my .sig.
Thx for your help,
\sh
--
Stephan Hermann
eMail: sh(a)sourcecode.de Blog: http://linux.blogweb.de/
JID: sh(a)linux-server.org
OSS-Developer and Admin
Hi,
The Dist Meeting decided yesterday that the Shared Library Naming Policy
should be applied to new packages. I've submitted a rpmlint package yesterday
that should contain a list of existing legacy exceptions. Obviously, due to a
bug in one of the scripts I missed some.
I've fixed that and the currently failing packages should build with the next
rebuild.
Thanks,
Dirk
--
RPMLINT information under http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hello,
we're (Lukáš Tinkl and myself) want to stop supporting gpg (aka.
GnuPG). Reason is, that developing of gpg has stopped (only in bugfix
mode), and use gpg2 instead, as it seems to be getting a stable
version now.
Therefore we are doing a switch in openSUSE 10.3 RSN:
- gpg will be dropped
- gpg2 will be renamed to gpg
We didn't noticed any problems regarding backward compatibility,
but we weren't able to do verey single test case. :-)
If your package contains a interface toward gpg, like YaST
Online-Update mode, please check this move out. Please fill out
bugreports on bugzilla, if you think there are.
Thanks for your patience.
Regards,
Klaus.
--
Klaus Singvogel
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5 E-Mail: Klaus.Singvogel(a)SuSE.de
90409 Nuernberg Phone: +49 (0) 911 740530
Germany GnuPG-Key-ID: 1024R/5068792D 1994-06-27
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hi,
under http://www.suse.de/~dmueller/sysv5-deps.ps is a dot graph that shows the
start dependencies of the /etc/init.d scripts that are on our DVD media (as
of alpha5).
Given that I found 3 errors in them in less than 5 minutes, I guess you could
take a look yourself if your package has correct dependencies specified.
Regarding boot time optimisation: it is a good idea to reduce the number
of "levels" and increase parallelism, as modern machines are almost always
SMP.
Currently there is a hard sync point between runlevel B (the boot.* scripts)
and all other runlevels. As you can see easily on this graph, this hard sync
point doesn't really help boot time.
Thanks,
--
RPMLINT information under http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Dear listmembers,
yesterday I stumbled over an annoying feature of current packaging:
assume you build a kernel - rpm (say: kernel-default-2.6.21-190.i586.rpm) that differs from the original openSUSE package.
You can install that but now, you need a module to make a device work (say: ipw3945-kmp-1.2.0-5.24.src.rpm) and want to build the corresponding rpm, you will be told that you have to install the kernel-syms package for your kernel.
Ok. Build the kernel - syms, but this won't work as you need to install *all* kernels to build the kernel-syms package.
Carefully speaking this is not helpful. I would suggest having a kernel-syms package with each kernel. Ok, this would increase the number of rpm-packages somewhat, but it is really annoying to build and install 6 kernels if you need just one - because you have to create the appropriate kernel-syms package.
And, given the rpm package management I highly prefer to use rpm's in favour of make and make install processes for the kernel and the modules. "Handcrafting" of the ipw module fails anyway if you do not know exactly what you're doing.
Take care
Dieter Jurzitza
--
________________________________________________
HARMAN BECKER AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS
Dr.-Ing. Dieter Jurzitza
Manager Hardware Systems
System Development
Industriegebiet Ittersbach
Becker-Göring Str. 16
D-76307 Karlsbad / Germany
Phone: +49 (0)7248 71-1577
Mobile: +49 0151 - 16 339 017
Fax: +49 (0)7248 71-1216
eMail: DJurzitza(a)harmanbecker.com
Internet: http://www.becker.de
*******************************************
Harman Becker Automotive Systems GmbH
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Dr. Peter Geiselhart - Michael Mauser - William S. Palin - Edwin Summers - Regis Baudot
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Karlsbad - Registergericht: Mannheim HRB 361395
*******************************************
Diese E-Mail enthaelt vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschuetzte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtuemlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und loeschen Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestattet.
This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the contents in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.
*******************************************
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hi,
there are new checks being added to the Factory rpmlint package that will
become errors soon:
init-script-without-%stop_on_removal-preun
package installs an /etc/init.d script, but doesn't run the %stop_on_removal
macro in %preun
init-script-without-%insserv_cleanup-postun
package installs an /etc/init.d script, but doesn't run %insserv_cleanup
in %postun
for understanding why those are necessary, please read the packagers manual /
suse packaging conventions. There are about 93 packages affected. I'd like to
hear about false positives in order to improve the check.
invalid-desktopfile
package contains a .desktop file that doesn't validate. (use
desktop-file-validate on it to understand why). 259 (!) packages are
affected.
untranslated-desktop-file
package installs a .desktop file but doesn't run %suse_update_desktop_file on
it. 138 packages are affected.
The library policy checker has been updated to give more accurate information.
Those warnings are not becoming an error any time soon, so consider them for
information only.
There is also an informational check for files that shouldn't be in a suse
linux binary package, like the generic (source-) INSTALL instructions or
README's for non-linux operating systems. I don't know exactly yet how many
packages are affected, but its somewhere around 600.
Greetings,
Dirk
--
RPMLINT information under http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hi,
we just submitted the switch to GCC 4.2 into STABLE (not yet checked in).
BETA builds already quite some time with that as default compiler, so you
can check your packages there, if they show funny compiler errors or
warnings.
Once checked in (which requires some magic from the autobuild guys to
prefer the right compiler) you might see such errors:
I: Expression compares a char* pointer with a string literal.
Usually a strcmp() was intended by the programmer
E: pfstools stringcompare picture_io.cpp: 90
It's not clear yet, if that check gets disabled or not, but it's clearly a
bogus construct, so fixing it is the proper thing to do.
You might also hit error messages about changes in handling of some inline
functions (which mostly are used only in glibc in the problematic way,
which is already fixed because we also have glibc 2.6 in STABLE since a
week or so). See http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/changes.html for that, in
particular the "C family" chapter. An abstract:
* In the next release of GCC, 4.3, -std=c99 or -std=gnu99 will direct GCC
to handle inline functions as specified in the C99 standard. In
preparation for this, GCC 4.2 will warn about any use of non-static
inline functions in gnu99 or c99 mode. This new warning may be disabled
with the new gnu_inline function attribute or the new -fgnu89-inline
command line option. Also, GCC 4.2 and later will define one of the
preprocessor macros __GNUC_GNU_INLINE__ or __GNUC_STDC_INLINE__ to
indicate the semantics of inline functions in the current compilation.
So, look in beta, or wait for gcc42 to be checked into STABLE as default
compiler. Happy fixing :-)
Ciao,
Michael.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org