On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 11:54:14 +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 11:52:28 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > On 10/8/19 3:26 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:03:48 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Look, I'm no more in love with the traditional
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 11:52:28 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On 10/8/19 3:26 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:03:48 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Look, I'm no more in love with the traditional layout than anybody, I'm
> > > just
> > > saying changing the defa
On 10/8/19 3:26 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:03:48 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
Look, I'm no more in love with the traditional layout than anybody, I'm just
saying changing the default is not as simple as you'd like to think. Anybody
wanting to work on changing the default i
Will it be possible to document and modernize the configuration to build
a rpm package in Fedora? It will be really great to make the guideline
seamless and less messy.
Luya
On 2019-10-08 12:38 p.m., Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
On 10/8/19 6:04 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Would anyone else
On 10/8/19 6:04 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Would anyone else have the cycles to review/update these pages in the
meantime please?
https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.fedoraproject.org%2Fen-US%2Fquick-docs%2Fcreating-rpm-packages%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cprzemek.klosowski%
- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 1:10:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Has fedpkg + dist-git replaced rpmbuild for building new/local
> packages?
>
>
>
>
> Dne 08. 10. 19 v 12
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:03:48 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>
>
> Look, I'm no more in love with the traditional layout than anybody, I'm just
> saying changing the default is not as simple as you'd like to think. Anybody
> wanting to work on changing the default is welcome to propose it upstream
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 13:10:18 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
>
> I'll add this to the docs pages when I find time. It can go in the
> "prepare your system" section:
>
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/creating-rpm-packages/#preparing-your-system-to-create-rpm-packages
>
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 12:04 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 12:21:05 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> Yup. If you prefer working in a dist-git like layout, just configure rpm do
>> behave that way. One possibility is simply:
>>
>> %_topdir %{getenv:PWD}
>> %_sourcedir %{_topdir}
>> %
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 12:21:05 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> Yup. If you prefer working in a dist-git like layout, just configure rpm do
> behave that way. One possibility is simply:
>
> %_topdir %{getenv:PWD}
> %_sourcedir %{_topdir}
> %_specdir %{_topdir}
> %_srcrpmdir %{_topdir}
>
On 10/8/19 12:45 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 11:21 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
On 10/8/19 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
[...]
2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
something li
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 09:07:14 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 12:38:21AM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 20:40:07 +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I think we are talking about different things.
> > >
> > >
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 10:57:14 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 08. 10. 19 v 1:38 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
> > to link to the "How to create a GNU Hello world package" which focuses
> > on building the rpm only and not the rest of the process. This is here:
> > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/q
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 11:21 Panu Matilainen napsal(a):
> On 10/8/19 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> [...]
>>> 2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
>>> something like `fedpkg --release master s
On 10/8/19 11:54 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
[...]
2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
something like `fedpkg --release master srpm` but even so basic think
requires either shuffling with file
On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 12:38:21AM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 20:40:07 +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I think we are talking about different things.
> >
> > It all depends on which question the doc is trying to answer.
>
> So, there are two diff
Dne 08. 10. 19 v 1:38 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
to link to the "How to create a GNU Hello world package" which focuses
on building the rpm only and not the rest of the process. This is here:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/create-hello-world-rpm/
Unless there are strong objections,
On Tuesday, 08 October 2019 at 08:34, Vít Ondruch wrote:
[...]
> 2) fedpkg would not be needed if rpmbuild would be sanely able to do
> something like `fedpkg --release master srpm` but even so basic think
> requires either shuffling with files on FS or specifying million of
> working directories.
It seems that the biggest issue with the documentation you have is the
`fedpkg` and I agree, we should not recommend it. Instead of `fedpkg`,
this should be used to create the SRPM:
~~~
$ rpmbuild --define "_sourcedir `pwd`" -bs package.spec
~~~
However, from this point, the mock should be us
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 04:39:22PM +0200, David Kaufmann wrote:
> Although I have to re-symlink SOURCES everytime I work on a different
> package I can use all of rpmbuild, mock, fedpkg,… from the same source
> folder.
You can also use a wrapper script that can be called in dist-git working
copie
Dne 07. 10. 19 v 16:26 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:02PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, what workflow do existing package maintainers user
>> while packaging new software? Is it `fedpkg` based with a folder for the
>> spec to work in? (I st
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 20:40:07 +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I think we are talking about different things.
>
> It all depends on which question the doc is trying to answer.
So, there are two different documents with two different target
audiences.
- The first is this:
https:
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 20:40:07 +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think we are talking about different things.
>
> It all depends on which question the doc is trying to answer.
>
> You are talking about "How do I contribute a package to Fedora". Then
> I agree, the doc should cover mai
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 7:53 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 05:38:51PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Michael Catanzaro
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:11 pm, Ankur Sinha
> > > wrote:
> > > > So I guess
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 05:38:51PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:11 pm, Ankur Sinha
> > wrote:
> > > So I guess I am arguing that while the "new package for existing
> > > maintainers" remain at the `fe
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:11 pm, Ankur Sinha
> wrote:
> > So I guess I am arguing that while the "new package for existing
> > maintainers" remain at the `fedpkg` level of doing things, the "join
> > the
> > package collection maintainer"
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 4:12 PM Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 12:56:51 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 12:13:34PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 12:16:28 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > > If you would like to have rpmbui
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 3:11 pm, Ankur Sinha
wrote:
So I guess I am arguing that while the "new package for existing
maintainers" remain at the `fedpkg` level of doing things, the "join
the
package collection maintainer" page for newbies, who should not be
assumed to have prior knowledge about
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 4:15 PM Ankur Sinha wrote:
>
> Out of curiosity, what workflow do existing package maintainers user
> while packaging new software? Is it `fedpkg` based with a folder for the
> spec to work in? (I still use rpmbuild + mock/koji-scratch builds).
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Regards,
>
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:02PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Out of curiosity, what workflow do existing package maintainers user
> while packaging new software? Is it `fedpkg` based with a folder for the
> spec to work in? (I still use rpmbuild + mock/koji-scratch builds).
I'm only a packager s
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:02PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> Out of curiosity, what workflow do existing package maintainers user
> while packaging new software? Is it `fedpkg` based with a folder for the
> spec to work in? (I still use rpmbuild + mock/koji-scratch builds).
I do:
mkcd foo (bas
Out of curiosity, what workflow do existing package maintainers user
while packaging new software? Is it `fedpkg` based with a folder for the
spec to work in? (I still use rpmbuild + mock/koji-scratch builds).
--
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 12:56:51 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 12:13:34PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 12:16:28 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > > If you would like to have rpmbuild mentioned in the docs, then mock
> > > should be
> > > mention
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 12:13:34PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 12:16:28 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > If you would like to have rpmbuild mentioned in the docs, then mock should
> > be
> > mentioned as well.
>
> mock is mentioned in the "Create an hello world rpm" doc:
> http
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 12:16:28 +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> If you would like to have rpmbuild mentioned in the docs, then mock should be
> mentioned as well.
mock is mentioned in the "Create an hello world rpm" doc:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/create-hello-world-rpm/
But, "mak
If you would like to have rpmbuild mentioned in the docs, then mock
should be mentioned as well. Or both can be omitted for simplicity. But
definitely, we should not suggest plain rpmbuild IMO.
Vít
Dne 07. 10. 19 v 11:32 Ankur Sinha napsal(a):
> Hi,
>
> I was looking at this quick-docs page[1]
Hi,
I was looking at this quick-docs page[1] which is mentioned in the "New
package process for existing contributors" page[2]. It now does not use
rpmbuild---it uses `fedpkg` and dist-git.
This is also linked to the "Join the package maintainers page"[3].
Is this now the suggested way---and is
37 matches
Mail list logo
