Thomas Bechtold <tbechtold@suse.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 02:13:14PM +0100, Adam Spiers wrote:
Thomas Bechtold <tbechtold@suse.com> wrote:
I would like to have something like gem2rpm for python. This could be py2pack.
I think py2pack already *is* the gem2rpm equivalent for Python.
Except that you usually need to adjust the generated spec file by hand (i.e. update-alternative handling)
Last time I looked, you did for gem2rpm too. Maybe that's changed more recently?
It would generate a .spec file from a given pypi tarball.
Uhh ... isn't that what it does already? Or am I going senile?
Yes. But as I said, the spec needs to be adjusted by hand usually. You can't just call py2pack for a new upstream release. It's currently only useful for the initial convertion from pypi to a spec.
That's certainly also how gem2rpm started out, at least.
The process to generate the spec could be tweaked via a config file (similar to gem2prm). Is that what you have in mind?
Well, there's certainly no harm in stealing ideas for features from gem2rpm. But I thought the main point of this thread was to calculate the Requires and Provides at build-time, so that py2pack doesn't need to put them in the .spec file at all?
That's the question I guess. Do we want to have the Requires/BuildRequires explicit in the spec (added by a py2pack rerun whenever you update the spec) or implicit via a macro (which may also run py2pack to extract the Requires/BuildRequires).
Implicit via a macro! Why have extra mess in the .spec if we can avoid it? As per the OP, Fedora is doing it via macros, and we already do it via macros for Ruby, so I can't think why we wouldn't want to do this. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org