openSUSE Packaging March 2010

packaging@lists.opensuse.org

49 participants
34 discussions

[opensuse-packaging] Right usage of libexecdir?
by Vincent Untz 25 May '11

25 May '11

Hey, Dominique and I are currently wondering what to do wrt libexecdir for evolution-data-server. Should we leave it unchanged (so files will be in /usr/lib) or should we change it to /usr/lib/evolution-data-server? If the latter, is there any reason this is not done automatically? Also, hrm, would rpmlint have ways to warn about packages that put binaries in libdir instead of libexecdir? (I can find a few of them here with a grep) 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

6 9

[opensuse-packaging] query - compiling package wflogs.
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 08 Apr '10

08 Apr '10

Hello I am trying to compile project called wflogs. Project -> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=wflogs&project=home%3Adoiggl Last log -> https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log?arch=x86_64&package=wflog… spec file -> https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=wflogs.spec&package=wflog… I have a link to another project called wfnetobjs too (no wfnetobjs rpm installed yet) Last set of wflog errors: configure: error: wfnetobjs-incdir: no directory found, use configure option error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.w8AYXU (%build) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.w8AYXU (%build) System halted. Can someone assist me to compile this package please. 1. I think Ive got to install wfnetobjs rpm but dont know to set that in the spec file. 2. Also I got to do the configure bit with a call like (but unsure how to set in the spec file) # ./configure --with-wfnetobjs-libdir=/usr/include/wallfire/ help appreciated. Cheers Glenn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

5 13

[opensuse-packaging] Easter and Milestone 5
by Stephan Kulow 07 Apr '10

07 Apr '10

Hi, Milestone 4 is out and Milestone 5 is going to be released next week. But there is a catch: Germany (and a lot of the western world) has holidays either friday or monday (or both in the case of Germany). So while I moved the release data of Milestone 5 to friday next week, this only means we will still take a couple of packages on april, 6th - but the big majority of packages needs to be submitted by tomorrow. With 274 diffs in devel projects, that is a lot to submit. So please take care not to miss the deadline. Note that M5 will bring a new Xorg and a new kernel - and a lot of people have vacation around the holidays, so if you don't make it, there won't be time for extra hand holding. And for those that keep wondering about milestones: Milestone 5 is the last release before we head into feature freeze. After it I only allow leaf packages to be updated - including a text freeze for all of it. Milestone 6 is then the first "Beta" - i.e. a milestone after feature freeze, so Milestone 5 will traditionally be the worst, please don't make it even worse. For details of your forgotten devel project: http://tinyurl.com/factory-status Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

7 10

[opensuse-packaging] applying a patch
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 06 Apr '10

06 Apr '10

Hello I am trying to get a kernel that will be patched, then obs to to compile it to generate a .rpm and I need some assistance. - Its based on kernel 2.6.33.x , so Ive set up a link to the sources of the package kernel-source of project Base:Kernel. Details are: <link project='Base:Kernel' package='kernel-source' cicount='copy'/> Questions: - What does the BuildRequires line need so kernel-source-2.6.33.x gets installed (e.g kernel-source-2.6.33-6.2.src.rpm) ? - How can the patch be applied ? , its in patch.bz2 format Project -> https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=r4testdot33&project=home%3A… Assistance appreciated. Thanks Glenn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

3 8

[opensuse-packaging] future libpng packaging (was: package name of libpng14)
by Petr Gajdos 31 Mar '10

31 Mar '10

Hi list, todays situation is as follows: libpng12-0 package has two subpackages, namely libpng3 and libpng-devel. The first one contains compatibility stuff and seems to be deprecated, as Christian Rodrígez pointed out yet, so only libpng-devel is relevant nowdays. libpng3 will be removed from libpng12-0 package. libpng-devel contains versioned and unversioned stuff, for example /usr/bin/libpng-config -> libpng12-config /usr/bin/libpng12-config /usr/include/libpng12 /usr/include/libpng12/png.h /usr/include/libpng12/pngconf.h /usr/include/png.h -> libpng12/png.h etc. While we are going to have libpng14-14 with 1.4 branch in addition to libpng12-0 I am forced to rework this package a bit. We propose (together with sbrabec) the following: The pair of main packages containing shared libraries will be libpng12-0 and libpng14-14 installable in parallel and independently from other four packages of course. There will be another pair of packages, libpng12-devel and libpng14-devel with versioned files (thanks to Jan Engelhardt to pointing this out). These packages will require libpng12-0 or libpng14-14 respectively. The last pair of packages form libpng12-compat-devel and libpng14-compat-devel containing the common files, like /usr/bin/libpng-config, /usr/include/png.h, etc. symlinks and man-pages (maybe we should have -doc package here?). These packages will require libpng12-devel and libpng14-devel respectively. BOTH will obsolete and provide libpng-devel symbol and BOTH will conflict with otherproviders(libpng-devel). Prefer: libpng14-compat-devel implies: 1. applications using 1.2 version only (-lpng12, etc.) should require libpng12-devel, 2. applications not checking for libpng version and failing with 1.4 branch should require libpng12-compat-devel, 3. applications building against 1.4 can depend on libpng-devel the same way as they do till now. With Prefer: libpng12-compat-devel in prjconf situation would be dual. One of questions is, if we should Prefer: libpng14-compat-devel or Prefer: libpng12-compat-devel in openSUSE 11.3. You can see packages in home:pgajdos:libpng14-14, I am using the latter Prefer: there. You can notice that spec files for both branches are the same except for -%define minor 2 -%define micro 43 +%define minor 4 +%define micro 1 %define branch %{major}%{minor} -Name: libpng%{branch}-0 +Name: libpng%{branch}-%{branch} What do you think? Any comments, suggestions, ...? Petr

5 4

[opensuse-packaging] Moving lilypond to multimedia:apps with the intention to submit it to factory.
by Dave Plater 29 Mar '10

29 Mar '10

Hi, I'm planning to move lilypond from openSUSE:Factory:Contrib to multimedia:apps and to submit it to factory, to enable multimedia:apps and factory rosegarden4 to require it. I'm making this announcement because I've maintainer rights in multimedia:apps and don't want to unwittingly abuse my privilege. I will wait until Wednesday before doing this and when it's accepted into factory will disable the factory build in contrib and delete the binaries leaving only 11.2 and 11.1 available. Any comments welcome. Regards Dave P -- 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] Request to move lilypond from contrib to factory?
by Dave Plater 28 Mar '10

28 Mar '10

Hi, I asked how to go about moving lilypond to factory on the packaging list and it was suggested that I ask on this list as well as a submit request. I've made submit request id 35916 already and here are my reasons :- I maintain contrib lilypond and multimedia:apps rosegarden4,rosegarden4 should "Require: lilypond" but because lilypond resides in contrib I can only recommend it in rosegarden because a new user might not have the contrib repo enabled. Lilypond used to be part of the main distribution and I belive it was moved to contrib due to lack of maintainer. I'm also not sure which devel project it should go to, it's a musical notation printing program, so I have submitted it from contrib. See also http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=546120#c6 Thanks Dave P -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

1 1

[opensuse-packaging] How can I move a package from contrib to factory?
by Dave Plater 28 Mar '10

28 Mar '10

Hi, I maintain contrib lilypond and multimedia:apps rosegarden, rosegarden should Require: lilypond but because lilypond resides in contrib I can only Recommend it in rosegarden because a new user might not have the contrib repo enabled. Lilypond used to be part of the main distribution and I belive it was moved to contrib due to lack of maintainer. How do I go about moving lilypond back to factory? I'm also not sure which devel project it should go to, it's a musical notation printing program. See also http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=546120#c6 Thanks Dave P -- 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] Newly prepared virtualbox-ose in Virtualization repo
by Michal Seben 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

Hi all ! Because of bnc#567435 (duplicated symbols in vbox kernel modules) we have to split kernel packages for virtualbox-ose. Well and this is already done (in Virtualization repo https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=virtualbox- ose&project=Virtualization), but we also decide to clean up a spec file a little. This is also already done, but package needs testing. We also decide to move virtualbox-ose to Virtualization repo where it belongs. Just a notice : backported will be only last stable product (11.2 today) I will switch devel directory from Virtualization:VirtualBox to Virtualization next week + and I will try to push all changes to Factory. (I want to hit Milestone 5) Suggestions how to improve virtualbox-ose.spec in Virtualization repo are welcome. Preferred way is through the submitrequest :) bye! -- 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] Proposal for a shell scripting policy
by Guido Berhoerster 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

Hello, following up the discussion on upstart and init scripts I'd like to propose a new policy on shell scripting. Shell scripting policy ---------------------- /bin/sh can be only expected to support the SUSv3 Shell Command Language, this allows dash, ksh, and bash to become /bin/sh. Init scripts should use /bin/sh, but may use /bin/bash with proper justification, e.g. not just for using ==, [[ ]], or echo -e which are easily replaced by SUSv3 compliant constructs. New packages containing scripts using /bin/sh must be tested with dash as /bin/sh (dash -n/checkbashisms.pl may aid debugging but are not sufficient by themselves). Any errors should be fixed and reported upstream. The rpm specfiles and scriptlets use bash and a GNU userland by default (I think everything else would be a pain to fix because of the many bashisms and GNUisms in specfiles). Rationale --------- * Choice and diversity are good: the ulimate goal would be to allow any SUSv3 compatible shell in openSUSE (currently ksh93, bash, and dash) to be used as /bin/sh * Quality and Correctness: /bin/sh is not /bin/bash, using other shells may expose bugs, corner cases etc. * Speed: bash is slow, allowing scripts to run on other shells such as dash or ksh93 may lead to speedups in certain situations * Portability: allow the re-use of scripts written for openSUSE on other OS What other distros are doing ---------------------------- Fedora does not seem to have a policy on shell scripts, according to the Debian policy handbook (which also applies to Ubuntu) /bin/sh can only be assumed to support the SUSv3 Command Language whith three exceptions, those are support of echo -n, test -a/-o and local. Note that this is not entirely correct, echo -n, test -a/-o are as XSI extensions part of the SUSv3 just not POSIX. Implementation -------------- The implementation of this policy could happen gradually over time assisted by a new rpmlint check which uses dash -n and checkbashisms.pl. In my opinion %_buildshell should point to /bin/bash, simply because fixing all the bashisms and gnuisms (pushd, popd, == etc.) in specfiles would be too much work. Building packages with dash as /bin/sh may expose bugs in build systems which will need to be fixed upstream. However, since Debian and Ubuntu have been doing this for some time, many issues are likely to be resolved already and there is pressure on upstream maintainers to fix their scripts. In the long term /bin/sh could default to dash, choosing ksh93 and bash should remain a possibility through the use of update-alternatives. Finally, here is a rough estimate on the scale of the issue: * on February 22nd the Factory OSS Repository (i586/i686/noarch) contained 8002 binary packages * there are 4065 /bin/sh scripts (267 of which are init scripts) in 1092 packages, furthermore there are 3481 /bin/sh rpm scriptlets in 1488 packages * checkbashisms.pl shows warnings for 794 scripts (100 of which are init scripts) in 372 packets (note that checkbashisms.pl is not very reliable) * dash -n leads shows syntax errors in 356 scripts (16 of which are init scripts) in 111 packages (haowever this does not detect all errors) Comments, Suggestions? -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help(a)opensuse.org

5 26

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

openSUSE Packaging March 2010