openSUSE Packaging March 2008

packaging@lists.opensuse.org

46 participants
34 discussions

[opensuse-packaging] Some notes from your friendly autobuild team
by Marcus Rueckert 14 Apr '08

14 Apr '08

hi, 1. good ways of doing library policy compatible packages Since quite some time we have some policy for packaging shared libraries. [1] We all had lots of fun and work with it already. There is some way to save some work for all of us. I will use libetpan as an example here. in the current factory package we have libetpan11 and libetpan-devel. and in the queue there is an update that would bump the soname to libetpan.so.13. now it would be renaming a package in autobuild, rename the spec, rename the changes file and check in the new package. To save us all a bit work we slightly change the packaging: we rename the package back to libetpan and let the spec generate an empty main package. Additionally we have 2 subpackages (libetpan13 and libetpan-devel). Of course you should add a provides to the libetpan13 package: Provides: %{name} = %{version} 2. Renaming a package Just a short not how the proper provides/obsoletes should look like in the usual case -> [2] with kind regards darix [1] http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/Shared_Library_Packaging_Policy [2] http://en.opensuse.org/Upgrade_Dependencies#Renaming_a_package -- 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

5 6

[opensuse-packaging] [RFC] Proposal: Distribution Branding (RC3)
by Stanislav Brabec 31 Mar '08

31 Mar '08

Hallo. RC3 of Distribution branding proposal was just released on the Wiki: http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Branding It is intended as addition to the SUSE Package Conventions Feel free to fix minor issues and discuss major problems or missing issues. Important changes since RC2: - "opensuse" is now consistently "openSUSE" - Self conflict added to branding packages to ensure conflict of one branding with each another (proposed by coolo) - New sections regarding Branding and themes - New sections regarding GNOME packages branding - Branding virtual package specification -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec(a)suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 966, +49 911 740538747 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] Next openSUSE milestone: crypto/base freeze
by Stephan Kulow 31 Mar '08

31 Mar '08

Hi, Just a small reminder - this is the last week to submit changes for the base system and do version updates for crypto related routines. From http://en.opensuse.org/Roadmap/11.0: Mon, Apr 7 Component freeze for beta1, crypto freeze Milestone: We have settled for a KDE branch to go for Milestone: Feature and version freeze for the base system Milestone: Kernel and install works on most targeted machines. Milestone: Packages containing cryptographic routines are frozen (ECR) Preliminary Authoring Deadline for localized doc files (ADL loc prelim) 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

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] rpm/lzma upgrade issue
by JP Rosevear 29 Mar '08

29 Mar '08

Trying to upgrade to the latest internal rpm this morning (rev 181) from a factory box that hadn't been updated in a couple weeks I received the following error: rpmlib(PayloadIsLzma) <= 4.4.2-1 is needed by rpm-4.4.2-181.x86_64 Presumably because the older rpm could not update itself because of the new payload requirements. Updating to the intermediate rev 179 that was available in the public channel worked around the problem. There are two potential issues: 1) People using zypp to upgrade factory may be halted from upgrades and the more critical: 2) People on older distros may be unable to upgrade to 11.0 when it comes out. Coolo suggested we might need to define some core packages that don't use the new payload system so upgrades work, but it seems like it yast potentially we'd have to upgrade rpm first and then upgrade the packages even if we fix that. -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

6 12

[opensuse-packaging] Re: commit mozilla-nspr
by Wolfgang Rosenauer 28 Mar '08

28 Mar '08

Hi, h_root wrote: > +- Split out a shared library subpackage. > +Source1: README.SuSE > Patch1: prdtoa.patch > Patch3: pkgconfig.patch > BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-build > +Requires: libnspr4 = %{version} > > %description > NSPR provides platform independence for non-GUI operating system > @@ -52,8 +56,26 @@ > -------- > Mozilla Foundation <drivers(a)mozilla.org> > > +%package -n libnspr4 > +Summary: Netscape Portable Runtime > +Group: System/Libraries > +Requires: %{name} >= %{version} I'm wondering about that "split". I understand and support the shared library policy for most cases but I don't support it in this case. The package now consists of mozilla-nspr libnspr4 subpackages where mozilla-nspr only contains README.SuSE (which I have yet to see) and libnspr4 which contains three shared libraries with different names and without SO-versioning. If it's really mandatory that the package name is libnspr4 (while libnspr4.so is only one of the three libs) then please just do a package rename. So to summarize that looks like a split which effectively only is a package rename with some overhead and is only done for the sake of the rename. Personally I think keeping the consistency with older distributions in that special case outweighs the value of that change. Please tell me if I'm wrong and what I don't see. Wolfgang --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

2 4

[opensuse-packaging] Review Request: themonospot - Avi parser and content descriptor
by hman 27 Mar '08

27 Mar '08

Hi, i dev a cross platform open source (GPLv2) application to scan and edit avi file: http://www.integrazioneweb.com/themonospot dev in C# using MONO and GTK i used OpenSUSE Build Service to build tarball for openSUSE 10.3 and Factory https://build.opensuse.org/project/show?project=home:hmandevteam:themonospot repo: http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/hmandevteam:/themonospot/ i would like to publish it in openSUSE repository. Could you help me ? --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] Changes in the desktop menu part of the package conventions
by Vincent Untz 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

Hi, Starting a new thread with a clear title so everybody reads it :-) I've updated the desktop menu part of the package conventions [1] to fix some errors. See [2] for the discussion. Here's the detail of the changes: + GenericName is not the key used for the tooltip. It's the Comment key. Fixed the examples accordingly. + Make the examples valid .desktop files. Also use StartupNotify and StartupWMClass instead of old KDE-specific keys. + the Encoding key is deprecated, so I removed any mention of it. + Fix the description of the Icon key. The value can be an absolute path. Also link to the icon theme specification to explain where icons should be installed. Thanks, Vincent [1] http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Desktop_Menu [2] http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-packaging/2008-03/msg00102.html -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] Fixing package conventions
by Vincent Untz 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

Hi, I found several errors on http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions/Desktop_Menu What is the process to fix them? I guess it's a bit more complex than just editing the wiki page? Here are the errors: + the xboard example has this line: "Categories=Game;BoardGame" It's missing a ; at the end of the line + Encoding explicitly defines the encoding used in the desktop file. The value “UTF-8” should be used. => the Encoding key is deprecated now, and shouldn't be used any more. The files are always UTF-8 encoded. + Icon defines the icon connected with the application. The value is an icon name without a suffix. Only the .png and .xpm icons are supported. They must be installed either below /usr/share/pixmaps/ or below /opt/gnome/share/pixmaps/. => the value can also be a path to an icon. The icon should be installed according to the guidelines defined in the icon theme specification if possible. + GenericName defines a comment that can be shown in a tool tip. It was defined by the key Comment in old desktop files. => that's wrong. The tooltip is still defined by the Comment key according to the spec. + the emacs.desktop example is not valid: Terminal=0 should be Terminal=false Also, X-KDE-StartupNotify=true should probably be StartupNotify=true and X-KDE-WMClass should be StartupWMClass + I'm confused by the list of categories. Some of them are not defined in the menus spec and shouldn't be used. It's not clear whether the small text above the categories implies that they should be prefixed with "X-SuSE-"? Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

4 7

[opensuse-packaging] RPM condition
by Bernhard Walle 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

Hello, can somebody help me in writing %if %{undefined rhel_version} && %{undefined centos_version} # code %else # code %endif in a way that the build in the OBS / SUSE_Linux_10.0 succeeds? I currently get a parser error. Thanks for your help. Bernhard --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

4 6

[opensuse-packaging] Naming of developer snapshot packages
by Ludwig Nussel 18 Mar '08

18 Mar '08

Hi, Suppose I have a package 'foo' for the stable release of that software but also want to package developer snapshots of e.g. the svn repo. I wonder how such a package should be named. Names such as foo-unstable foo-snapshot foo-devx foo-beta foo-experimental come into mind. Is there any established practice for the naming of developer snapshot packages? cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ 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

2 1

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

openSUSE Packaging March 2008