Hi,
the kernel-*.spec files contain a lot of hardcoded strings, such as
2.6.22.1 for what's currently cooking. This causes a major pain when
trying to bump the version by oneself. All occurrences need to be
replaced by more-or-less blunt scripts (simple perl -pe 's///'), since
the .in files are not available. If these could please be added to the
kernel-source pack, that would greatly simplify work.
Moreover, I think that strings, where possible, should be replaced by
rpm tags. For example this obvious one:
Provides: kernel = 2.6.22.1-%source_rel
(and other places)
this can easily be replaced by %version-%source_rel. The other major
thing being
Name: kernel-default
(and other places of course)
which could be replaced - since the macro is already there - by
Name: kernel-%build_flavor
thanks,
Jan
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hello,
creating the symlink to licenses in the licenses package is curently
done by including a small script in each spec file, like:
for FILE in COPYING copyright.txt ; do
MD5SUM=$(md5sum $FILE | sed 's/ .*//')
if test -f /usr/share/doc/licenses/md5/$MD5SUM ; then
ln -sf /usr/share/doc/licenses/md5/$MD5SUM $FILE
fi
done
This is error-prone (see bug 306681) and adds lots of duplicated code to
the spec files.
Please add a small script to the licenses package or create a rpm macro
that creates the symlink. If the rpm macro could also drop in a
"Requires: licenses", it would be even better.
The specfile should then contain commands like (replacing the example
above):
%symlink_license COPYING
%symlink_license copyright.txt
Oh, and please do this ASAP, before more package(r)s include the script
in the spec file ;-)
Regards,
Christian Boltz
--
31.8.-3.9.2007: Weinfest und Jubiläum 1225 Jahre Insheim
Pig Slip, Hifi-Delity, Human Fact, Frank Petersen und die Söhne Insheims
spielen bei der Landjugend.
Mehr Infos: www.Landjugend-Insheim.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
I am looking for an excelently written sample spec file for opensuse
with the following characteristics:
1) uses gtkmm and gnomemm.
2) has a .desktop file.
3) uses auto* tools.
4) otherwise fairly simple
Also I would like to understand %gconf_schemas_prereq
What does this macro do? Where is it documented?
Thank You.
--
Paul Elliott 1(512)837-1096
pelliott(a)io.com PMB 181, 11900 Metric Blvd Suite J
http://www.io.com/~pelliott/pme/ Austin TX 78758-3117
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
Hi,
it turns out that using %fdupes unconditionally over all of %{buildroot} can
cause hardlinks to be created between files that are possibly installed on
different physical partitions on the customer`s system.
It turns out that RPM is unable to handle that gracefully. Therefore I`ve
added a new check which complains if there is a hardlink accross the first
two levels of a path.
These checks will be fatal in BETA (somewhen in the near future), please watch
for failures and fix your packages.
the always current list of affected packages (sorry guys, suse internal only):
$ grep hardlink-across ~dmueller/Export/pita/pita.lst
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
Cristian Rodriguez wrote:
> tabris escribió:
>
>> So I'll be looking into those when I get a chance.
>>
>
> good, then we can continue discussion on the opensuse-packaging list, we
> are offtopic here in -project. ;-)
>
Ok, I applied the patch provided to my SVN repo
http://svn.tabris.net/repos/procinfo-ng/ to trunk/
As to the warnings, they look bogus to me.
I'm using int64_t and uint64_t. It looks like to be silence the
warnings, I'd need to do any of the following:
a) do my own typedefs. blecch, plus might be non-portable.
b) use different sprintf statements depending on __WORDSIZE. that's not
much better
# if __WORDSIZE == 64
typedef long int int64_t;
# else
__extension__
typedef long long int int64_t;
# endif
#if __WORDSIZE == 64
typedef unsigned long int uint64_t;
#else
__extension__
typedef unsigned long long int uint64_t;
#endif
On 2007-08-30 12:31:28 +0200, dpecka(a)suse.cz wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prelinking
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/prelink-howto.xml
> http://www.linuxcommand.org/man_pages/prelink8.html
>
> what about to add this package to system base? i tested it ok, and looks
> like that this magic thing runs as it described..
we have a prelink package since 2001 already.
darix
--
openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux
openSUSE is good for you
www.opensuse.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
I was packaging a library in the build service, trying out the shared
library policy found here:
http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy
Some thoughts:
1) The "simple" example at the end does not take into account where %doc
files should go (AUTHORS, COPYING, README) etc.
Suggestion is we say this goes into the lib<whatever><major> package
number. Except I just ran into a case where the package had two
different .so names
2) No reference to .la files
Do we finally want to kill those as a matter of policy? If so, should we
write a macro to do it?
3) Separation of soname number from library name
We could always put the dash in for more consistency ie libz-1 instead
of libz1 so when the library name ends in a number its libwhatever2-7
and its easier for humans to parse (probably).
As well libssl is a horrible example to use because it does not follow
proper .so naming, it always reflects the version number rather than
incrementing based on ABI compatability
I'll update the wiki if we can agree on any changes.
-JP
--
JP Rosevear <jpr(a)novell.com>
Novell, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:31 +0200, dpecka(a)suse.cz wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prelinking
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/prelink-howto.xml
> http://www.linuxcommand.org/man_pages/prelink8.html
>
> what about to add this package to system base? i tested it ok, and looks
> like that this magic thing runs as it described..
Is there a good write-up of the real performance & memory savings that
prelink gives, particularly with the new --hash-style=gnu optimisation ?
prelink has a surprising number of associated problems, so having a
clear view of the benefit would be useful. It is also said that running
it will horribly fragment the disk, negating any cold-start win ;-)
Regards,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks(a)novell.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org
Hi,
I came across opensuse-updater-kde which has following set
of Provides / Obsoletes:
Name: opensuse-updater-kde
Provides: opensuse-updater = 0.5
Obsoletes: opensuse-updater <= 0.5
Does this work? Won't it obsolete/deinstall itself?
Ciao, Marcus
--
Working, but not speaking, for the following german company:
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
