Dear Factory contributors and packagers,
As openSUSE 12.2 is frozen and Factory is 'open to go wild' again, I
would like to announce that the packaging guidelines have some
extensions (not really new) that will be stricter enforced than they
used to be.
Currently a common rule to be 'ignored' or packagers are not aware is
around the topics of:
- .Changes entries
- Patches
First, the .changes entry (rpm changelog) surves two purposes:
- News for the user
- History tracking of packaging changes (often referenced in bugs to
verify if a user has the latest packaging bugfixeS).
A simple "Update to version x.y.z" is, as before, not accepted. There
should be some buzz around the update for the user; some major reasons
to the upgrade should be listed
Changes on the package itself should be mentioned in a way that any
other contributor to the same package can follow traces of why
something is the way it is. Commonly, Added (build)dependencies are
interesting to be seen, special hacks to make something work in a
particular way [..]: Always consider that package maintenance is a
distributed task and various contributors need to be able to step up
at will.
Patches:
The rules about patches are listed at
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines .
Most prominent is likely the mentioning of the patches life cycle,
which forces you to mention additions and removals of patches in the
changelog. As history shows, this can be helpful if a patch got
removed, and later a regression is reported; finding out when a patch
was removed can be crucial in reconstructing feature sets (including
contacting the contributor that dropped it.. which is easily extracted
from the .changes if listed)
The main appeal is to the devel project maintainers / reviewers, to
keep out for those rules, to live according to them, as it is
frustrating for everybody if a package needs to be declined by the
Factory Review team:
- The dev prj maintainer is the one getting the 'decline' (as it was
usually a forwarded request), which often leaves the 'fixing' to the
devel project maintainers, where the 'originator' of the fix would
have been willing to actually do that...
And the Factory Review team also prefers to see complying submissions
to having to reject SRs... reject is not fun for anybody!
Looking forward to many more SRs to accept!
Dominique / DimStar
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hi:
I will no longer maintain fix or otherwise care about the "at" daemon,
starting now because I would rather devout my time testing and improving
systemd.timer(5)
So it is now up for grabs.
that's all ;)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org
All,
I sent the httrack package to security a couple weeks ago. It builds,
but with a few rpmlint issues.
I thought I would clean up the one about the shared library needing to
be split out to its own package.
I've tried to do that in home:gregfreemyer:branches:security > httrack
The diff is:
https://build.opensuse.org/package/rdiff?opackage=httrack&oproject=security…
I've tried multiple ways to call ldconfig.
But my build always fails with:
[ 218s] libhttrack2.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin
(Badness: 300) /usr/lib64/libhtsjava.so.2.0.46
[ 218s] libhttrack2.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin
(Badness: 300) /usr/lib64/libhttrack.so.2.0.46
[ 218s] This package contains a library and provides no %post
scriptlet containing a
[ 218s] call to ldconfig.
The spec file currently has:
===
%post
/sbin/ldconfig /usr/lib64
%postun
/sbin/ldconfig /usr/lib64
===
I've tried the basic versions as well.
==
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
==
%post
/sbin/ldconfig
%postun
/sbin/ldconfig
==
Can anyone tell me what's going on?
Thanks
Greg
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hello everyone,
as you know, we're recently formed a team that will take care of the
packaging guidelines and introduced a small process to change them:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines_change_process
I would like to start discussion about Common Lisp and create Lisp
packaging related rules.
The first version of it you can find there:
http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Lisp
(please discuss here before edit something in wiki)
I don't know how many Lisp developers we have, but I invite everybody
to find and create most interesting, correct and optimal packaging
rules for openSUSE distribution.
Alex
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hi,
I'm looking for new maintainers for these two packages:
devel:libraries:c_c++/libgsasl
This is the GNU SASL library. It's used by a few packages, is alive
upstream with a nice maintainer. I only touched this package because
another packages I was working on was using it, and inherited from
maintenance this way. But I really don't look at it, so I feel it
could do with more love.
hardware/festival
This is a speech synthesis system. I'm not quite sure how much it's
still used; it used to be a dependency for GNOME accessibility (which
is why I somehow became maintainer, I guess), but it's not used there
anymore.
I'm happy to give magical powers to anyone willing to take over those
packages :-)
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
Hi,
I know this is more of an obs question than a packaging question.
Say I know I released a buggy package in a big and busy repo. A new
version has been committed but it won't be published because the repo
never comes to rest, is always getting commits before all builts
affecting it are done and as I understand a repo will only publish when
it's come to rest.
Is there a way I could say "don't schedule new builds before the current
queue is done and published" ?
--
Ralf Lang
Linux Consultant / Developer
Tel.: +49-170-6381563
Mail: lang(a)b1-systems.de
B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg /
http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537
Malcolm Moore píše v Čt 29. 11. 2012 v 09:51 +0000:
> LO update to stable !
> I was half way through updating 400 machines when this happened :-(
Ah, that is pity but I had to do it one day. I am not aware about any
reasonable way how to warn people.
> 3.6.3 has a nasty bug
> Start a new document, insert / object / chart
> Save document , close writer and reopen then reopen the document
> The chart is gone
I am not able to reproduce this. Have you tested it with the last build?
Do you use .odt or some other file format?
> You can do the same thing by copying and pasting a chart from Calc
> If the chart existed in a document created in 3.5.4 it works
Also this works fine with .odt file format.
> Can I have the old stable back please :-)
I am sorry but I do not want to maintain too many projects and versions.
LO-3.5 is not longer supported upstream, so 3.6 is the way to go.
If you want to make sure that the upcoming version does not include
critical regressions, please do early testing with the packages from the
LibreOffice:Unstable repo or upstream and report bugs.
Most of the bugs should be the same also in the upstream build, so we
prefer to report bugs into the upstream bugzilla.
Also we are looking for more voluteers that would help to sort the
upstream bugs, see
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Triage_For_Beginners
Best Regards,
Petr
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hey,
I am trying to build php5-pear-Horde_Autoloader for Debian 6. The build
requiers are debian's pkg-php-tools, which I provide in
server:php:applications. Sadly it gets unresolvable messages.
"Nothing provides update-alternatives".
I doubt that there is no update-alternatives package in the Debian 6
Build target. How can I access this?
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=pkg-php-tools&project=serve…
What should I do to build pkg-php-tools against debian squeeze?
Thanks,
Jeremias
--
Jeremias Broedel
Linux Consultant
Tel.: +49-173-2070608
Mail: broedel(a)b1-systems.de
B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org