openSUSE Packaging December 2014

packaging@lists.opensuse.org

26 participants
17 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] Using autogen.sh in a spec file?

by Johannes Kastl

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, sorry if this is an old hat, but I just stumbled upon it. lxc changed the sources layout between 1.0.x and 1.1, and no longer directly includes a configure file. So it has to be generated via ./autogen.sh. What's the right way to do this in a spec file? Just call the autogen.sh script? Or is there a macro for it? I found an older mail from Ludwig (and others), where %_configure is being redefined to run autogen.sh http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-packaging/2011-02/msg00032.html Regards, Johannes - -- Having a 'non-smoking' section in a restaurant is like having a 'non-peeing' section in a pool. (Robin Cowdrey) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlSGCLsACgkQzi3gQ/xETbIwhgCdG6lr0laxVh9Nx6S5PrY5T3kv T70AoIaU6xzPExgSlKd7mteIPRMsyi2b =iO+j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

5 years, 10 months

[opensuse-packaging] File-package-in-two-packages-error only on 13.1?

by Johannes Kastl

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Evening everybody, is there a reason why the following is an error only on 13.1, and not on 13.2? > ERROR: /usr/sbin/rclxc is packaged in both lxc-libs and lxc, and > the packages do not conflict The package is here, and as you can see, it builds fine for > https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:ojkastl_buildservice… Is > this intentional? Or what am I missing? (The solution is to exclude the link in the files section of the libs package. And the error is gone on 13.1, too, and it builds fine. At least locally) Regards, Johannes - -- Working with Unix is like wrestling a worthy opponent. Working with windows is like attacking a small whining child who is carrying a .38. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with SeaMonkey - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlSXEXsACgkQzi3gQ/xETbJ/dwCfeDA0SLYhtzuFE0A+7ZyxSROX ckcAnRpp4CXQOAoN9jY6MEvrLkJExvbe =cvzv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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] have a choice

by Peter Czanik

Hi, I did not change anything other than updating the syslog-ng version (3.6.1 to 3.6.2), but yesterday my syslog-ng package compiled on SLES 12, and today not any more. I get the following error: Getting buildconfig from server and store to /root/home:czanik:syslog-ng36/syslog-ng/.osc/_buildconfig-SLE_12-x86_64 buildinfo is broken... it says: unresolvable: have choice for syslog needed by syslog-service: syslog-ng rsyslog Why do I get this error, and how can I resolve this? As you can see, other platforms compile just fine: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:czanik:syslog-ng36/syslog-ng Bye, CzP -- 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] Binary packages not being published?

by Erico Mendonca

Hello all, I have (one of many) weird problems with Build Service. Here's the first one. :-) I built this package: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:emendonca:branches:devel:langu… Which has an _aggregate on another branched project and two packages: <aggregatelist> <aggregate project="home:emendonca:branches:devel:languages:perl"> <package>perl-Gnome2-Vte</package> <package>perl-macros</package> <repository target="SLE_11" source="SLE_11_SP3" /> </aggregate> </aggregatelist> The package perl-Gnome2-Vte has an aggregate on perl-macros: <aggregatelist> <aggregate project="home:emendonca:branches:devel:languages:perl"> <package>perl-macros</package> <repository target="SLE_11" source="SLE_11_SP3" /> </aggregate> </aggregatelist> So the whole build dependency chain is: perl-macros -> perl-Gnome2-Vte -> pac-manager. The whole thing works, and all the packages get built successfully. The webui indicates that the resulting packages were published... but they are nowhere to be found. I already tried deleting built binaries and triggering new rebuilds, but the result is always the same. Only the first package binary (perl-macros) gets published. What am I doing wrong here? Erico Mendonça Dedicated Support Engineer (Work)+55 (61) 8594-9557 (Main) +55 (11) 3345-3900 (Personal) +55 (61) 9115-3256 emendonca(a)suse.com -- 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] How to force a forked package to stay?

by Stanislav Baiduzhyi

Let's say I have a fork of one of the packages that comes with system core. That fork is targeted for very special target audience or special use-cases, so please no flaming on the topic of how wrong is it to do something like that... But, that fork consists of libs and devel packages, and every time update for this package comes in main repository - it gets replaced with updated non- forked version. Or someone installs lib from official version and devel from forked version, which is again wrong. What is the recommended way to force a pair of those packages to stay in the system? I can think of some ways to do it: * add custom provides to the spec file and make devel version require certain provider of lib. But that will only protect from installing incompatible versions of devel and lib packages, but not from installing both of them. * add synthetic package that will depend on first two, again by certain custom providers. This means that update will not be installed because other package has a dependency for that provider. But yast update will complain every time about that, and yes that does not sound very good. * bump a version to 99.%{version}, to make it the newest existing provider for both library and devel. But devel will have to require exactly the same version. So, for that use-case, should I use any of those workarounds, or there is better way of doing it? -- Regards, Stas -- 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] How to use gcc49 at OBS

by Dmitriy Perlow

Hi to all! How gcc49 can be used for oS 13.2? If it is required to build unresolvable state will appear with message "conflict for provider of libgcc_s1 >= 4.9.0+r211729-2.1.7 needed by gcc49, (provider libgcc_s1-gcc49 is conflicted by installed libgcc_s1)". By the way gcc49 isn't my goal, I would like to make a clang build with gcc 4.9' environment so any tips are welcomed. -- Best regards, Dmitriy DA(P).DarkneSS Perlow @ Linux x64 -- 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] new rpmlint-Factory-strict failures in TW

by Olaf Hering

All Factory and TW packages in packman start to fail because for some reason rpmlint-Factory-strict-1.0-89.115 is now installed. This seems to include a license check, which is most likely needed just in OBS and IBS. I wonder if this was a change in OBS, and if so how can I can avoid to change a very large amount of spec files. If this was caused by the update of the buildservice version in PMBS, what is the knob to disable rpmlint-Factory-strict again? http://lists.links2linux.de/pipermail/packman/2014-December/013353.html Thanks, Olaf -- 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] 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] SuSE version macros

by Michael Ströder

HI! Is there a comprehensible list/table of SuSE version macros usable in .spec files and some hints how they should be used? I'm having a hard time to distinguish SLES 11SP3, SLES12 and openSUSE 13.1+ to set right dependencies. Ciao, Michael.

5 years, 11 months

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

openSUSE Packaging December 2014