9.08.2019 22:10 Jerry James <loganjerry(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 2:12 AM Alexander Ploumistos
<alex.ploumistos(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> All the patches we carried were merged back in the latest upstream
> version (0.20.1), but when I took a stab at it, I got a lot of errors
> about the variable types and I did not know how to proceed.
I tried this as well and stumbled upon this bug:
https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?55356
Alexander, try the attached spec file. It leads to a successful
build
for me. (Sorry for doing this in email, but I'm currently in a place
where I can't make git pull requests.) It may need a little tweaking
still, and feel free to trim my verbose changelog entry if you decide
to use any part of it. :-)
I am not Alexander but since I've already started working on this
I think I can take a look. Your spec file looks mostly good. I have
some doubts which may be completely wrong (I have never looked at the
internals of gettext before) but just in case here we go:
%bcond_with jar
%bcond_with java
Before Jens' commit there was also a line:
%bcond_without check
If you remove it you enable the check phase unconditionally.
[...]
License: GPLv3+ and LGPLv2+ and GFDL
GFDL is a new thing here, I guess the public announce of the license
change will be needed.
Do we need to change ftp to https?
# ensure 'ARCHIVE_FORMAT=dirxz'
BuildRequires: xz
"BuildRequires: chrpath" removed here, really no longer needed?
# for documentation
BuildRequires: texlive-dvips
BuildRequires: texinfo-tex
It worked for me without these packages although the results
might have been different due of that.
BuildRequires: libacl-devel
Same here.
# for the tests
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-de
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-en
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-fa
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-fr
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-ja
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-tr
BuildRequires: glibc-langpack-zh
Good point.
%package devel
Summary: Development files for %{name}
# autopoint is GPLv3+
# libasprintf is LGPLv2+
# libgettextpo is GPLv3+
License: LGPLv2+ and GPLv3+ and GFDL
A comment why GFDL has been added here would be helpful.
Maybe it is not needed here?
%package -n libtextstyle
Summary: Text styling library
License: GPLv3+
[...]
Looks great. Are the licenses correct?
# Eliminate hardcoded rpaths; workaround libtool reordering
-Wl,--as-needed
# after all the libraries.
sed -e 's|^hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=.*|hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=""|g'
\
-e 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' \
-e 's|CC=.g..|& -Wl,--as-needed|' \
-i $(find . -name libtool)
Is this the reason why chrpath is no longer needed?
%check
# this takes quite a lot of time to run
Previously the %check was conditional (with "%if %{with check}").
See also my comment on top.
%{_bindir}/envsubst
%{_bindir}/gettext
%{_bindir}/gettext.sh
%{_bindir}/msgattrib
%{_bindir}/msgcat
%{_bindir}/msgcmp
%{_bindir}/msgcomm
%{_bindir}/msgconv
%{_bindir}/msgen
%{_bindir}/msgexec
%{_bindir}/msgfilter
%{_bindir}/msgfmt
%{_bindir}/msggrep
%{_bindir}/msginit
%{_bindir}/msgmerge
%{_bindir}/msgunfmt
%{_bindir}/msguniq
%{_bindir}/ngettext
%{_bindir}/recode-sr-latin
%{_bindir}/xgettext
Is it OK to list all these files explicitly?
%files -n libtextstyle-devel
%{_docdir}/libtextstyle/
In other subpackages the documentation (also in HTML format)
is moved to a directory htmldoc (although I am not sure why).
%changelog
* Fri Aug 9 2019 Jerry James <loganjerry(a)gmail.com> - 0.20.1-1
- update to 0.20.1 release, all patches upstreamed
It would be nice to mention the bug report rhbz#1708013.
Also see this comment which suggests adding an upstream patch:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1708013#c2
Regards,
Rafal