Re: Mass spec file change: Adding BuildRequires: make
In my spec files, I use %cmake, %cmake_build and %cmake_install. A priori, I now that I must add BuildRequires cmake but I don't now the details of the macro. So, I don't now if the %cmake macro is tuned to build a ninja or a make project. I think the cmake should ship a minima the build tools used by the %cmake macro. - Mail original - De: "Fabio Valentini" À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Envoyé: Jeudi 3 Décembre 2020 17:32:24 Objet: Re: Mass spec file change: Adding BuildRequires: make On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 5:17 PM Tom Stellard wrote: > > On 12/3/20 7:39 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 4:35 PM Tom Stellard wrote: > >> > >> On 12/2/20 5:45 AM, Artem Tim wrote: > >>> How to quickly retest packages which listed here > >>> https://fedorapeople.org/~tstellar/needs_br_make_packages.txt? I've > >>> tested few locally and in Koji Rawhide scratch, but they are compiled > >>> fine. > >>> ___ > >> > >> If the packages use make and they BuildRequire: make then there is > >> nothing else to do. I will try to re-run the scripts everyday to keep > >> the list updated. > > > > I still think a lot of those are "false positives". > > CMake has a hard Requires on make, so if I BuildRequires cmake, adding > > "BuildRequires: make" is just redundant. > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cmake/blob/master/f/cmake.spec#_185 > > > > The only safe way to do this is to add BuildRequires: make to every > package that uses make. We can't depend on these dependency chains to > keep things working, because they may not always be there. That argument doesn't hold much water. CMake always requires a backend, and right now it hard-requires make. Until that's no longer the case, adding BR: make to packages already having BR: cmake is just a waste of time. If I can't be sure of *anything*, then wouldn't I have to add the entire expected dependency tree as BRs?, down to glibc and filesystem? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Package review sum-ump
Hello, I little sum-up about the package review I submitted. Mamba: a virtual MIDI keyboard with also support playing SF2 soundfonts. I posted (by mistake) 2 packages review for this package ... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1893711 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887709 libsmf: This is a library to read / write MIDI files and it's a dependency of Mamba. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1895696 Jamulus: A tool to perform rehearsale via internet. You can stream audio channels with a really low latency (around 10 ms). In this package review, somebody has also posted its spec file. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1844120 lv2lint: A tool which perform syntaxical analysis of ttl files. A ttl files is a text description file you find in LV2 audio plugins. It describes audio capability, content, etc on a LV2 file. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865 I am still looking for sponsors to become packager for Fedora :) Best regards ! Yann ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Fedora 34 Change proposal: Remove make from BuildRoot (System-Wide Change)
The make package use 539k of space. And for gcc + C++ it's more than 30 Mo. Does it really worth the effort on changing all the dependent packages ? - Mail original - De: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Envoyé: Jeudi 5 Novembre 2020 14:42:08 Objet: Re: Fedora 34 Change proposal: Remove make from BuildRoot (System-Wide Change) On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 01:13:47PM +0100, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 9:46 PM Neal Gompa wrote: > > (snip) > > > > > Koji/Brew disables weak dependencies. The weak dependency would be for > > developer convenience. > > > > > If the change was automated and you did not have to do anything would > > > you still be opposed to having your spec files updated with > > > BuildRequires: make > > > > > > > You still need BR: make. > > Couldn't we add something like this to the cmake package? > > Requires: (make or ninja) > Suggests: make > > Which would make sure at least *one* of the available backends is > installed, and would make it prefer make if ninja is not specified > explicitly. It that works, it'd be great. Zbyszek ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Package for review: Mamba
Hello, I just submitted a new package for review: Mamba. It's a virtual piano keyboard developped by the guitarix developper. The package review link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887709 The github repo of Mamba: https://github.com/brummer10/Mamba Best regards, Yann ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: What package provide qmake?
Hello, I think you should look after qmake-qt5 instead of qmake ... qmake-qt5 is shipped by qt5-qtbase-devel Best regards, Yann - Mail original - De: "Robbi Nespu" À: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Envoyé: Lundi 5 Octobre 2020 09:55:01 Objet: What package provide qmake? Hello there, I want to get involve with KDE development. I have follow the step from https://community.kde.org/Get_Involved/development but unable to proceed to next step to build dolphin > $ kdesrc-build dolphin > Cloning sysadmin-repo-metadata > > > Unable to find qmake. This program is absolutely essential for building > the modules: knotifications plasma-wayland-protocols kcoreaddons > extra-cmake-modules kdesignerplugin kinit kparts kdnssd plasma-framework > kitemviews kservice kauth kdoctools ktextwidgets kpackage kbookmarks kio > polkit-qt-1 kirigami kross kiconthemes kconfigwidgets kcodecs kglobalaccel > ktexteditor kunitconversion kguiaddons kdeclarative kconfig kfilemetadata > kactivities kded karchive solid kwindowsystem knewstuff dolphin kjobwidgets > oxygen-icons5 kidletime kpty kcompletion kwidgetsaddons kxmlgui kcrash attica > kemoticons threadweaver kwayland. > > Please ensure the development packages for > Qt are installed by using your distribution's package manager. > > * Aborting now to save a lot of wasted time. > * export KDESRC_BUILD_IGNORE_MISSING_PROGRAMS=1 and re-run (perhaps with > --no-src) > * to continue anyways. If this check was in error please report a bug against > * kdesrc-build at https://bugs.kde.org/ what package provide qmake? > $ dnf provides qmake > Fedora 34 openh264 (From Cisco) - x86_64 > 1.0 kB/s | 2.5 kB 00:02 > Fedora - Modular Rawhide - Developmental packages for the next Fedora release > 345 kB/s | 3.1 MB 00:09 > Fedora - Rawhide - Developmental packages for the next Fedora release > 565 kB/s | 74 MB 02:13 > Error: No Matches found I am using Fedora rawhide > $ cat /etc/fedora-release > Fedora release 34 (Rawhide) The reason I use rawhide is because it can provide me latest qt. I am rookie with this development stuff. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Package fixed: seq24
I have already 2 packages in review: lv2lint: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1844120 jamulus: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1840865 - Mail original - De: "ycollette nospam" À: "Jerry James" Cc: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Envoyé: Vendredi 11 Septembre 2020 16:22:30 Objet: Re: Package fixed: seq24 Yes, I am really interested :) - Mail original - De: "Jerry James" À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Cc: "ycollette nospam" Envoyé: Vendredi 11 Septembre 2020 16:18:40 Objet: Re: Package fixed: seq24 On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 8:08 AM Scott Talbert wrote: > Unfortunately, it appears that package has been retired for some time due > to having failed to build. It will require a new maintainer to step up > and the package will have to go through a re-review. Yann, are you interested in maintaining the seq24 package? If so, we can help you through the process of becoming maintainer. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Package fixed: seq24
Yes, I am really interested :) - Mail original - De: "Jerry James" À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" Cc: "ycollette nospam" Envoyé: Vendredi 11 Septembre 2020 16:18:40 Objet: Re: Package fixed: seq24 On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 8:08 AM Scott Talbert wrote: > Unfortunately, it appears that package has been retired for some time due > to having failed to build. It will require a new maintainer to step up > and the package will have to go through a re-review. Yann, are you interested in maintaining the seq24 package? If so, we can help you through the process of becoming maintainer. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Package fixed: seq24
Hello, Just a mail to say I fixed the seq24 spec file. It works fine on Fedora 31 / 32 for now. Here is the bug report where I put the links to the fixed spec file: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1675986#c14 Best regards, Yann ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packaging problem
And is applying the workaround just for Fedora 31 tolerated ?
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom"
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Envoyé: Dimanche 31 Mai 2020 12:13:58
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
I think Qt will not be upgraded in F31.
You can just skip build for F31 and make package for F32 and rawhide only.
вс, 31 мая 2020 г., 13:08 < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >:
I tested with Fedora 31 and, it hangs.
I works fine with Fedora 32.
I report this problem to Jamulus or to Qt ? I think this problem is already
fixed on Fedora 32.
Does a Qt5 update is programmed for Fedora 31 ?
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom" < vasc...@gmail.com >
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
Envoyé: Dimanche 31 Mai 2020 11:50:49
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
You should report upstream about the problem and fix code.
вс, 31 мая 2020 г., 12:49 < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >:
Hello again !
I've got a new problem: a gcc flags trigger a problem during generation of an
object file.
The application is based on Qt5. The problematic file is produced from a moc
generated file.
The flag in question: -fcf-protection
The solution I found is to send a custom set of flags to qmake.
What is the best approach to remove a flags from a rpm macro variable ?
# optflags %{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection
# -fcf-protection produce an error in an object generatoin ...
qmake-qt5 Jamulus.pro \
QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
%make_build VERBOSE=1
- Mail original -
De: "ycollette nospam" < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:58:55
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
OK, thanks, it works with %{qmake_qt5} but not with %_qt5_qmake ...
Thanks a lot
I see that qmake_qt5 macro call _qt5_qmake with some flags ...
I found the macro via rpm --showrc | grep qmake and I choose the wrong result.
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom" < vasc...@gmail.com >
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:49:46
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
First you should use this macro %{qmake_qt5} and remove %{set_build_flags}.
And show your spec or give srpm.
сб, 30 мая 2020 г. в 22:21, < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got a problem with a package.
> I am trying to clean up a spec file before sending it to review and I've got
> an error:
>
> erreur : Empty %files file
> /home/artelys/rpmbuild/BUILD/jamulus-c6b6e3ab02d7ec1e93edeeb8042a89a561924826/debugsourcefiles.list
>
>
> The code is Qt-5 / c++. It's an application which allows to perform live
> rehearsale via an internet connection.
>
> On the gcc / c++ command line, I can see the -g flags.
>
> The build section:
>
> %{set_build_flags}
>
> %_qt5_qmake Jamulus.pro CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
>
> %make_build VERBOSE=1
>
> The install section (the qmake file defines no install rule so I must install
> everything manually):
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
> %__install -m 755 Jamulus %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/jamulus
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.desktop
> %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
>
> How can I build the debug part of the package ?
>
> The only solution I've found is to add:
>
> %global debug_package %{nil}
>
> At the beginning of the spec file ...
>
> Best regards,
>
> YC
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> L
Re: Packaging problem
I tested with Fedora 31 and, it hangs.
I works fine with Fedora 32.
I report this problem to Jamulus or to Qt ? I think this problem is already
fixed on Fedora 32.
Does a Qt5 update is programmed for Fedora 31 ?
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom"
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Envoyé: Dimanche 31 Mai 2020 11:50:49
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
You should report upstream about the problem and fix code.
вс, 31 мая 2020 г., 12:49 < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >:
Hello again !
I've got a new problem: a gcc flags trigger a problem during generation of an
object file.
The application is based on Qt5. The problematic file is produced from a moc
generated file.
The flag in question: -fcf-protection
The solution I found is to send a custom set of flags to qmake.
What is the best approach to remove a flags from a rpm macro variable ?
# optflags %{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection
# -fcf-protection produce an error in an object generatoin ...
qmake-qt5 Jamulus.pro \
QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
%make_build VERBOSE=1
- Mail original -
De: "ycollette nospam" < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:58:55
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
OK, thanks, it works with %{qmake_qt5} but not with %_qt5_qmake ...
Thanks a lot
I see that qmake_qt5 macro call _qt5_qmake with some flags ...
I found the macro via rpm --showrc | grep qmake and I choose the wrong result.
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom" < vasc...@gmail.com >
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora" < devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:49:46
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
First you should use this macro %{qmake_qt5} and remove %{set_build_flags}.
And show your spec or give srpm.
сб, 30 мая 2020 г. в 22:21, < ycollette.nos...@free.fr >:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got a problem with a package.
> I am trying to clean up a spec file before sending it to review and I've got
> an error:
>
> erreur : Empty %files file
> /home/artelys/rpmbuild/BUILD/jamulus-c6b6e3ab02d7ec1e93edeeb8042a89a561924826/debugsourcefiles.list
>
>
> The code is Qt-5 / c++. It's an application which allows to perform live
> rehearsale via an internet connection.
>
> On the gcc / c++ command line, I can see the -g flags.
>
> The build section:
>
> %{set_build_flags}
>
> %_qt5_qmake Jamulus.pro CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
>
> %make_build VERBOSE=1
>
> The install section (the qmake file defines no install rule so I must install
> everything manually):
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
> %__install -m 755 Jamulus %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/jamulus
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.desktop
> %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
>
> How can I build the debug part of the package ?
>
> The only solution I've found is to add:
>
> %global debug_package %{nil}
>
> At the beginning of the spec file ...
>
> Best regards,
>
> YC
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@li
Re: Packaging problem
Hello again !
I've got a new problem: a gcc flags trigger a problem during generation of an
object file.
The application is based on Qt5. The problematic file is produced from a moc
generated file.
The flag in question: -fcf-protection
The solution I found is to send a custom set of flags to qmake.
What is the best approach to remove a flags from a rpm macro variable ?
# optflags %{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection
# -fcf-protection produce an error in an object generatoin ...
qmake-qt5 Jamulus.pro \
QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE="%{__global_compiler_flags} -m64
-mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection" \
CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
%make_build VERBOSE=1
- Mail original -
De: "ycollette nospam"
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:58:55
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
OK, thanks, it works with %{qmake_qt5} but not with %_qt5_qmake ...
Thanks a lot
I see that qmake_qt5 macro call _qt5_qmake with some flags ...
I found the macro via rpm --showrc | grep qmake and I choose the wrong result.
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom"
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:49:46
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
First you should use this macro %{qmake_qt5} and remove %{set_build_flags}.
And show your spec or give srpm.
сб, 30 мая 2020 г. в 22:21, :
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got a problem with a package.
> I am trying to clean up a spec file before sending it to review and I've got
> an error:
>
> erreur : Empty %files file
> /home/artelys/rpmbuild/BUILD/jamulus-c6b6e3ab02d7ec1e93edeeb8042a89a561924826/debugsourcefiles.list
>
> The code is Qt-5 / c++. It's an application which allows to perform live
> rehearsale via an internet connection.
>
> On the gcc / c++ command line, I can see the -g flags.
>
> The build section:
>
> %{set_build_flags}
>
> %_qt5_qmake Jamulus.pro CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
>
> %make_build VERBOSE=1
>
> The install section (the qmake file defines no install rule so I must install
> everything manually):
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
> %__install -m 755 Jamulus %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/jamulus
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.desktop
> %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
>
> How can I build the debug part of the package ?
>
> The only solution I've found is to add:
>
> %global debug_package %{nil}
>
> At the beginning of the spec file ...
>
> Best regards,
>
> YC
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packaging problem
OK, thanks, it works with %{qmake_qt5} but not with %_qt5_qmake ...
Thanks a lot
I see that qmake_qt5 macro call _qt5_qmake with some flags ...
I found the macro via rpm --showrc | grep qmake and I choose the wrong result.
- Mail original -
De: "Vascom"
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:49:46
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
First you should use this macro %{qmake_qt5} and remove %{set_build_flags}.
And show your spec or give srpm.
сб, 30 мая 2020 г. в 22:21, :
>
> Hello,
>
> I've got a problem with a package.
> I am trying to clean up a spec file before sending it to review and I've got
> an error:
>
> erreur : Empty %files file
> /home/artelys/rpmbuild/BUILD/jamulus-c6b6e3ab02d7ec1e93edeeb8042a89a561924826/debugsourcefiles.list
>
> The code is Qt-5 / c++. It's an application which allows to perform live
> rehearsale via an internet connection.
>
> On the gcc / c++ command line, I can see the -g flags.
>
> The build section:
>
> %{set_build_flags}
>
> %_qt5_qmake Jamulus.pro CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
>
> %make_build VERBOSE=1
>
> The install section (the qmake file defines no install rule so I must install
> everything manually):
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
> %__install -m 755 Jamulus %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/jamulus
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.desktop
> %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
>
> How can I build the debug part of the package ?
>
> The only solution I've found is to add:
>
> %global debug_package %{nil}
>
> At the beginning of the spec file ...
>
> Best regards,
>
> YC
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Packaging problem
Yes, you're right :)
Here is a link to a build with the %global debug_package %{nil} :
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ycollet/linuxmao/fedora-32-x86_64/01415804-jamulus/
- Mail original -
De: "Björn 'besser82' Esser"
À: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
Envoyé: Samedi 30 Mai 2020 21:44:08
Objet: Re: Packaging problem
Am Samstag, den 30.05.2020, 21:20 +0200 schrieb
ycollette.nos...@free.fr:
> Hello,
>
> I've got a problem with a package.
> I am trying to clean up a spec file before sending it to review and
> I've got an error:
>
> erreur : Empty %files file /home/artelys/rpmbuild/BUILD/jamulus-
> c6b6e3ab02d7ec1e93edeeb8042a89a561924826/debugsourcefiles.list
>
> The code is Qt-5 / c++. It's an application which allows to perform
> live rehearsale via an internet connection.
>
> On the gcc / c++ command line, I can see the -g flags.
>
> The build section:
>
> %{set_build_flags}
>
> %_qt5_qmake Jamulus.pro CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
>
> %make_build VERBOSE=1
>
> The install section (the qmake file defines no install rule so I must
> install everything manually):
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
> %__install -m 755 Jamulus %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/jamulus
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.desktop
> %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/
>
> %__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
> %__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.png
> %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
>
> How can I build the debug part of the package ?
>
> The only solution I've found is to add:
>
> %global debug_package %{nil}
>
> At the beginning of the spec file ...
Without a scratch build and/or a link to the spec file / srpm its hard
to help, I guess…
Cheers
Björn
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Packaging problem
Hello,
I've got a problem with a package.
I am trying to clean up a spec file before sending it to review and I've got an
error:
erreur : Empty %files file
/home/artelys/rpmbuild/BUILD/jamulus-c6b6e3ab02d7ec1e93edeeb8042a89a561924826/debugsourcefiles.list
The code is Qt-5 / c++. It's an application which allows to perform live
rehearsale via an internet connection.
On the gcc / c++ command line, I can see the -g flags.
The build section:
%{set_build_flags}
%_qt5_qmake Jamulus.pro CONFIG+=opus_shared_lib
%make_build VERBOSE=1
The install section (the qmake file defines no install rule so I must install
everything manually):
%__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
%__install -m 755 Jamulus %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/jamulus
%__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/
%__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.desktop
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/
%__install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
%__install -m 644 distributions/jamulus.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/
How can I build the debug part of the package ?
The only solution I've found is to add:
%global debug_package %{nil}
At the beginning of the spec file ...
Best regards,
YC
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Presentation
Hello, I just registered the Fedora devel list. My name is Yann Collette. I use Fedora distribution since ... (I started with a Linux 1.2.7 :) and stay attached to Redhat / Fedora for a lng time). I use Fedora for music production and I manage a Fedora COPR repo to provide tools related to music: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ycollet/linuxmao/ All the spec files are on github: https://github.com/ycollet/fedora-spec If you're are looking for people to help packaging and maintaining packages, I can help. Best regards, Yann ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
