openSUSE Packaging November 2014

packaging@lists.opensuse.org

40 participants
25 discussions

[opensuse-packaging] Python 2 and 3 in single specfile

by Jan Matějek

Fellow packagers, after some discussions in our team, we figured that it would be neat if we could build python modules for Python 2 and 3 from a single spec file. Now that a great deal of python modules work with both pythons, this makes a lot of sense. A good deal of work can be done by RPM macros. Then we could even seamlessly start building modules for PyPy, Jython and other pythons. A sample specfile, and the corresponding set of RPM macros, is attached. As you can see, the appropriate subpackage is generated automatically by %python_subpackages, build and install steps are handled through %python_build and %python_install respectively. There is some more magic involved, as well as possibilities for customization. There is a minor problem with BuildRequires. As long as you only need python-devel, it's not too bad to just list $flavor-devel requirements by hand. It's worse when you require more subpackages, because then you need all of them in both python2 and python3 versions. It would be nice to be able to specify %{python_require Mako} and expand that to all the necessary BuildRequires, but OBS blocks us here, because the limited environment will not expand such macros. mls, ro, or anyone from the OBS team, would it be possible to solve this? Still, it basically doesn't matter if you list all the BuildRequires twice in one spec or in two specs, so there. Another thing I'm still unclear on are the filelists. It's certainly possible to make a generic filelist, something along the lines of: %package -n %flavor-%modname # python3-Mako %defattr(-, root, root) %{%flavor_sitelib}/* %{%flavor_sitearch}/* but this doesn't solve docs and possible other files. Again, obviously, we can write the filelists by hand. But if you have good suggestions for some smart macros here, I'd love to see them. What do you folks think? Comments, questions? m.

5 years, 4 months

[opensuse-packaging] Can Cacti package be updated to 0.8.8c from 0.8.8b

by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au

Hello Can Cacti package be updated to 0.8.8c from 0.8.8b http://forums.cacti.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=53725 https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/server:monitoring/cacti Thanks Glenn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

5 years, 11 months

[opensuse-packaging] systemd service presets: branding files or packages?

by Stanislav Brabec

I would like to open a discussion about use of systemd presets while packaging. Systemd preset files are preferred way how packages set the default state of services. Preset files are located in /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset directory. %service_add_post is aware of presets, and if the package adds systemd service together with presets, %service_add_post performs one-time set to the preset default state. Current policy is simple: All presets belongs to: systemd-presets-branding-{product} /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/90-default-openSUSE.preset and the default to disable all other: /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/99-default-disable.preset It makes a lot of sense for packages with optional services, that should be always on, like apache, network servers etc. But I think that makes less sense for packages that are optional to install, but it they are installed and not active, they are broken. Especially if they are socket activated, the standby state means no more than one socket opened by systemd. I have two examples from last weeks: uuidd: Optional socket activated util-linux daemon providing support for UUIDs. pcsc-lite pcscd: Smart Card daemon that is socket activated whenever application attempts to use Smart Card PC/SC API. If it is not enabled, Smart Card access does not work. Note that it has a security implication: Each package that installs default-on preset, should be audited by security team. Security team would need to watch the whole directory, not only a branding file. -- Best Regards / S pozdravem, Stanislav Brabec software developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. e-mail: sbrabec(a)suse.cz Lihovarská 1060/12 tel: +49 911 7405384547 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 284 084 001 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ PGP: 830B 40D5 9E05 35D8 5E27 6FA3 717C 209F A04F CD76 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

5 years, 12 months

[opensuse-packaging] need help writing specfile for OBS

by Steffen Sledz

I hope i'm on the right ML with my problem. Please forgive me if not. I need to write a specfile for use with openSUSE Build Service and have problems with the source fetching and versioning part. The sources for the project are hosted at GitHub and i like to build a snapshot from the HEAD of the master branch. So the package version should contain a (generated) numerical part which increments on each build and the (short) hash of the latest commit. I believe that the tar_scm, set_version and recompress services are needed here. But i could not find a good tutorial or example for this. Thanx for help, Steffen -- DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz@dresearch-fe.de Fax: +49 30 515932-299 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle; Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B; Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

[opensuse-packaging] A few failures of ruby packages in Tumbleweed

by Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger

Dear Ruby specialists, For a while already, a few ruby packages in Factory/Tumbleweed are not able to build (generally due to some packages changing to 'new' packaging style, but not others). The current list of packages is: * rubygem-locale_rails * rubygem-owncloud-admin * rubygem-xmlhash All of them being unresolvable. not directly a ruby build failure, but still related: puppet fails to resolve with: have choice for rubygem(ruby:2.1.0:json_pure) >= 0 needed by rubygem-hiera: ruby2.1-rubygem-json_pure-1_5 ruby2.1-rubygem-json_pure It would be greatly appreciated to have those corrected soon. Best regards -- Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar(a)opensuse.org> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

[opensuse-packaging] Issues with plasma5-openSUSE packages

by Stanislav Baiduzhyi

Hi All, I want to make a modified version of plasma5-openSUSE package for 13.2, but even the original unmodified package fails to build: https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:TheIndifferent:brand… Could anyone please explain me what is this about, what am I doing wrong and how the same package is built in KDE:Frameworks5 repository without issues? -- Regards, Stas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

[opensuse-packaging] Why is "recommends" required to install minimalist chromium?

by Felix Miata

13.1 zypp.conf: solver.onlyRequires = true zypper.conf: installRecommends = no # zypper -v in chromium 2 packages will be installed package chromium will be installed "recommended" package chromium-ffmpeg will be installed (cancel) # zypper al chromium-ffmpeg # zypper -v in chromium nothing provides chromium-dev needed by chromium-dev-ffmpeg (cancel) Why when "recommended" package installation is refused does chromium require a -dev package or risk breaking yet another (unwanted) package? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

[opensuse-packaging] new bot reviewing maintenance submission

by Ludwig Nussel

Hi, Released distributions like openSUSE 13.2 do not have devel projects. Therefore the process used for Factory where any submission has to pass by the actual package maintainers does not work. This has caused some surprises in the past. Now we have a new review bot meant to avoid non-maintainer submissions. The bot is now automatically added as reviewer for maintenance requests. It checks whether the package was submitted by someone who is maintainer of the Factory package. If the request was created by someone else the bot adds the devel project/package as reviewer. The Factory maintainer¹ then has the chance to accept or decline the update. Right now OBS has a bug that prevents it from sending mail notifications for those new reviews. I hope it will be fixed soon. The submit request are correctly listed on package maintainer's tasks lists on build.opensue.org though. cu Ludwig [1] only works for packages that are still in Factory of course. The bot doesn't know what to do with packages that were dropped (or renamed) from Factory so just let's them pass like before. -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5; 90409 Nürnberg; Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

[opensuse-packaging] How do I build the -32bit variant of a package using osc build?

by Robert Munteanu

Hi, I'm trying to rebuild wine with a patch applied on top. I've updated the spec file and rebuilt the rpm, both for x86_64 and i586, but I did not get an -32bit RPM. In the OBS repositories page [1] I see that the -32bit RPM is located in the i586 repo, but I'm not sure how it's built. I know I can branch the project and built it with the patch I need on OBS, but it is slow and wasteful to do that just to build a patch. Thanks, Robert [1]: https://build.opensuse.org/package/binaries/Emulators/wine?repository=openS… -- http://robert.muntea.nu/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

[opensuse-packaging] Are bashisms in RPM scriptlets allowed?

by Johannes Meixner

Hello, are bashisms in RPM scriptlets allowed? Up to now I ignorantly assumed that bash is used for RPM scriptlets so that bashisms in RPM scriptlets "just work". But I got https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/260498 By Googling for "bash rpm scriptlet site:opensuse.org" I did not find an authoritative answer. In particular neither https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_scriptlet_snippets nor https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Specfile_guidelines helps. I found http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-packaging/2010-03/msg00076.html where comments therein seem to indicate that bash is o.k. for shell scripts but to be on the safe side one should explicitly require it via "#!/bin/bash" shebang but as far as I know I cannot have a bash shebang in RPM scriptlets. FYI: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Default_Shell reads: "In Fedora, you can assume that the default shell (/bin/sh) is bash. Thus, all scriptlets can safely assume that if they are running in shell code, they are running within bash." Kind Regards Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH -- Maxfeldstrasse 5 -- 90409 Nuernberg -- Germany HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendoerffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 years

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

openSUSE Packaging November 2014