January 2012 - openSUSE Packaging - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[opensuse-packaging] namespace for system users?
by Ludwig Nussel 11 Feb '12

11 Feb '12

Hi, There's a request to add a system user 'tor': https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/96531 There is no name space separation between system users and actual logins. So especially for short names like the above there is a chance that it could collide with an already existing user name on some system. Having a system service running with the uid of an actual user isn't desirable. So what about mandating an extra prefix or suffix to (new) system user names like 'daemon' or 'service'? Ie in the above example the user name would be 'tor-daemon' or 'tor-service' instead of 'tor'. Other thoughts? cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

8 11

[opensuse-packaging] BuildRequires for 32-bit Java?
by Greg Freemyer 08 Feb '12

08 Feb '12

All, I'm trying to package a app that says it needs 32-bit Java. How do I say that in the spec file. Thanks Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 6

[opensuse-packaging] multimedia (and subrepos) project config
by Mariusz Fik 07 Feb '12

07 Feb '12

Hi, packages in multimedia:apps are built against libGLEW1_7 but this one it's not available in this repo - ie. clementine player. We need some multimedia:apps project config fix because we have now: unresolvable: have choice for libsndfile.so.1 needed by libpulse0: libsndfile1 libsndfile, have choice for libsndfile.so.1(libsndfile.so.1.0) needed by libpulse0: libsndfile1 libsndfile (at least for openSUSE12.1), something like: | Prefer: libsndfile1 to build against newer library version. Also we need to ship runtime dependecies for apps in multimedia:app, because using this repo without multimedia:libs is not possible now. -- Pozdrawiam / Best regards, Mariusz Fik openSUSE Community Member GPG: 5FCE 7241 B3B9 32FD 455B C30E 42D6 6C88 9E83 7C3D

8 9

[opensuse-packaging] Automatic submission of changes to Factory
by Vincent Untz 02 Feb '12

02 Feb '12

Hi all, For a while, we've had the issue of packages with changes in devel projects not always being submitted to Factory. At the last openSUSE Conference, it appeared that not everyone was aware that this had to be manually done, and one solution that was discussed involved automatic submission. After some push from coolo, I finished a script I started working on a while ago, and we now have obs-autosubmit: https://gitorious.org/opensuse/obs-autosubmit To put it simply, it submits unsubmitted changes to Factory. It tries hard to be clever, for instance: - it only submits changes if the .changes entry is different - it doesn't submit a change that is already submitted - it doesn't submit a change that was declined/superseded Coupled with the factory-auto checks, this means that changed packages that don't build won't get through. (This has one issue, though: if a package failed to build because of another package being broken and got automatically submitted, it won't be automatically submitted again when the other package gets fixed) However, automatic submission is something that some people might not want. For instance, in GNOME:Factory, that'd be insane as we generally need to push several packages together and we do this after testing G:F. Therefore, there's a way to disable this automatic submission for either a whole project, or specific packages. Right now, this way is a hardcoded list, but we'll likely use attributes in the future. If you want to *not* have automatic submission for your project or your package, please tell me! For reference, a test run on Friday gave this result: - 375 packages to be automatically submitted. - 179 packages with changes, but no difference in .changes. - 73 packages with changes, already submitted in the past but declined/superseded/etc. - 78 packages with changes, already submitted. - 5 packages with changes, but autosubmit disabled. Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

11 39

[opensuse-packaging] Packaging QuodLibet
by Eric Cook 31 Jan '12

31 Jan '12

Yo, New to packaging and i am trying to build quodlibet. The spec file is based on this one i found[1] and changed it a little so it can match the lastest version[2]. The package builds(rpmbuild -ba file.spec) with no errors but i can't seem to find where the package file is located at, ~/rpmbuild/{RPMS,SRPMS} is empty. [1] https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=quodlibet.spec&package=qu… [2] http://paste.opensuse.org/77144030 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] Web Font Formats: Where to install?
by Thomas Schraitle 30 Jan '12

30 Jan '12

Hi, during my font packaging for M17N:fonts, I've come across an installation issue for Web fonts. For example, let's consider the St Marie[1] font. It is such a "Web font"[2] and is published in several Web font formats as SVG[3], EOT[4], and Woff[5]. The current root directory to search for fonts is /usr/share/fonts. It contains several subdirectories whereas truetype and Type1 are certainly the best known/most used. But... there is no directory for SVG, EOT, and Woff files. IMHO they should be separated, but no other dir seems to fit. Where do I install such files? Thanks! ----- References [1] http://www.behance.net/gallery/St-Marie/551975 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_fonts [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svg [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_OpenType [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woff -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany _\_v http://www.suse.com http://lizards.opensuse.org/author/thomas-schraitle/ SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

4 5

[opensuse-packaging] M17N:fonts: Google Webfonts and a Hg Repo
by toms＠suse.de 30 Jan '12

30 Jan '12

Hi, just to let you know about some changes in the M17N fonts directory that I did recently and some information that I've found. :) It might be interesting for other packagers in this regard. The repo contains now 66 fonts with different styles covering several languages. Not all of them are submitted to Factory. Over the weekend I've submitted some new fonts from the Google Webfonts[1] page. Most of them came from my OBS repo, so it was just a copy and some cleanup necessary. What is/was always challenging is the current version of the font. Is there a more up-to-date version of the font available? Unfortunatly, this information was not displayed on the page anymore. Maybe it was. During packaging, I've stumpled over the corresponding Mercurial repo[2] of the Google Webfonts. It's clearly structured, some contains even a SFD file for FontForge. If you want to know the latest changes, watch for a FONTLOG.txt. There you can see all things that has been changed recently. The Mercurial repo makes it easier for us packagers. Hope this small info helps others. Have fun! ----- [1] http://www.google.com/webfonts [2] https://code.google.com/p/googlefontdirectory/ Caveat: Pretty big, 1.2G(!) -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle ---------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH (o< Maxfeldstrasse 5 /\\ Documentation Specialist 90409 Nuernberg, Germany _\_v http://www.suse.com http://lizards.opensuse.org/author/thomas-schraitle/ SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] new package for filesystem: can someone accept / reject 99686
by Greg Freemyer 27 Jan '12

27 Jan '12

All, I submitted a new package to filesystems 2 weeks ago. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/99686 Can someone take a look at it. fyi: Is there a better way to prompt someone. I'd have done a private email, but there are a bunch of maintainers and I don't have any idea who normally would review a new package for the filesystem repo. Thanks Greg -- Greg Freemyer Head of EDD Tape Extraction and Processing team Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer CNN/TruTV Aired Forensic Imaging Demo - http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/23/how-computer-evidence-gets-retrie… The Norcross Group The Intersection of Evidence & Technology http://www.norcrossgroup.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 2

[opensuse-packaging] Source URLs are not valid
by Peter Czanik 27 Jan '12

27 Jan '12

Hello, My latest push to Factory was declined with the following message: " Output of check script: Source URLs are not valid. Try "osc service localrun download_files" " This is what I currently have in syslog-ng.spec: " #Source0: http://www.balabit.com/downloads/files/syslog-ng/sources/%%{version}/source… Source0: syslog-ng_%{version}.tar.gz " How should I fix this to get it accepted? Bye, CzP -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-packaging] Split rpm-build from rpm
by Stephan Kulow 25 Jan '12

25 Jan '12

Hi, I just accepted rpm in openSUSE:Factory, which comes with a rather important change to everyone building packages[1]: rpmbuild is no longer part of rpm.rpm, but split into rpm-build. So if you want to build a binary rpm, you need to install rpm-build, it won't be part of the default installation anymore. And the good part about it: it requires all the packages that building an rpm needs, I also took the freedom to include xz in that. I will clean up the Support: list in the factory project config to be pure support. All the packages that openSUSE installs automatically for convenience in build environments to reduce buildrequires are tracked by the requires of rpm-build now, so they will also work if someone builds a srpm on his system. Let's see how far we can go with that. Greetings, Stephan [1] Of course if you use osc to build your packages, nothing changes. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0