packaging September 2007

packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org

29 participants
24 discussions

Tcl packaging guidelines proposal
by Michael Thomas 02 Jan '08

02 Jan '08

I sent this proposal to f-m-l about a week ago to gather comments, and there were no serious disagreements with the proposal which have not yet been addressed (thanks to Tibbs and Toshio for their feedback). Basically, I want to establish a set of guidelines for packaging Tcl extensions, as we already have guidelines for other popular scripting languages. In addition to making Tcl packages more consistent with each other, it will also help work toward fixing my pet-peeve bug (bz #226893) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Tcl Please let me know if I need to do anything to help get these draft guidelines adopted. Thanks, --Wart

4 10

Octave package standard
by Orion Poplawski 03 Oct '07

03 Oct '07

I'm currently working with octave upstream to get their new package management system in line with Fedora so that we can easily build RPMs with it. I'd like to get a Fedora package standard configured and approved at the same time. I've put a draft on the wiki at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Octave Some further information: - Currently octave uses the /usr/libexec tree to install the .oct files. These are really shared libraries. It does use an arch/api versioned directory, e.g.: /usr/libexec/octave/packages/java-1.2.1/i386-redhat-linux-gnu-api-v26/ Some other package files (PKG_ADD/PKG_DEL) get added there too. - Currently the entire octave forge collection is part of the octave-forge package. I will releasing this for F8, with the understanding that this will be replaced by individual packages later. The octave forge package will have provides like: Provides: octave-gsl = 1.0.1 to try to provide a better upgrade path. We may want to keep the octave-forge as a meta package that pulls in the others. Let me know if this doesn't seem correct. - DISTPKG (%{octave_distpkg}) is a flag that this is being built by a package manager. The contents get inserted into an informational message, but otherwise does not mean much. -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA/CoRA Division FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)cora.nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.cora.nwra.com

3 5

error on DistTag wiki page?
by John Dennis 27 Sep '07

27 Sep '07

I think there might be an error on the following wiki page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag There are examples there like this: # If on Fedora 8, Requires: foo %{?fc8: Requires: foo} But if fc8 is defined you get an rpm error stating Unknown tag: Requires: foo After much fooling around I think I tracked the problem down to the fact RPM won't tolerate any white space in front of the "Requires:", I finally recalled that RPM will choke if it sees indentation in certain places in the spec file. The net effect of the macro on the wiki was that "Requires:" was indented by 1 space. It seems like it has to be: %{?fc8:Requires: foo} I will update the wiki but I thought I would sanity check my conclusion first. IMHO RPM's parsing is way too fragile, it took me a while before it occurred to me it was the space character causing the error. The error message wasn't very helpful either, did anybody else notice there were two spaces between the "Unknown tag:" and the "Requires" in the error message implying the tag was " Requires" and not "Requires"? John

3 2

tex related packages naming
by Patrice Dumas 25 Sep '07

25 Sep '07

Hello, Could it be possible for the packaging commitee to decide on that issue, please? The proposals are: * prefix with tex- * no specific naming. Prefix with tex- when another package has the same name Could it be possible to have a vote/decision on that issue? In any case I think that a (long) period should be left for packagers to change their package names. -- Pat

7 10

"gconfd-2: no process killed" messages
by Thorsten Leemhuis 24 Sep '07

24 Sep '07

Hi, I'm running rawhide these days again and during yum update I quite often see messages like > Updating : gedit ##################### [173/382] > gconfd-2: no process killed > Updating : deskbar-applet ##################### [174/382] > gconfd-2: Kein Prozess abgebrochen > Updating : gnome-terminal ##################### [175/382] Looking closer at the spec and at the Gconf session on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ScriptletSnippets it seems they run killall -HUP gconfd-2 || : to make sure any running gconfd-2 pick up newly installed schemes. But well, as you can see from above output there might be cases when no gconfd-2 is running, thus killall will print a warning. I think we should avoid such useless warnings -- thus it would seem better to me to use killall with "--quiet" or use killall -HUP gconfd-2 2> /dev/null || : instead. What do you guys think? Cu knurd

7 12

rpmdevtools required for rebuilding packages on F7
by Marcin Zajączkowski 23 Sep '07

23 Sep '07

Hi, Recently my friend (which isn't a Fedora packager) was rebuilding my package on F7 and he got an error. It seems that there is check-rpaths used: + /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.39128: line 43: /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths: No such file or directory error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.39128 (%install) There is no that call in FC5 and it was probably introduced in F7. check-rpaths is provided by rpmdevtools which isn't on "the minimum build environment" list: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-4cadce5e79d38a63cad… (maybe because it was in Extras prior to F7) So the question, shouldn't it be added to mentioned list? Regards Marcin

3 3

font package naming
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 21 Sep '07

21 Sep '07

Hi, I would like to propose adding the following text to our "Package Naming Guidelines". http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines ''' == Fonts Packages == Font packages should be named with the upstream name appended with `-fonts`. Examples: {{{ bitmap-fonts dejavu-lgc-fonts ghostscript-fonts urw-fonts xorg-x11-fonts }}} ''' Should the text discuss what to do when the upstream name contains the word "font" already? See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-February/msg00794.h… and https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-March/msg00262.html for some recent discussion of <upstreamname>-fonts vs fonts-<language> and "-fonts" vs "-font" for singlet font packages. Comments or objections? Jens ps We might even consider renaming some of our "fonts-*" packages to follow this naming scheme for F8.

4 10

Apologize for missing the meeting
by Jason L Tibbitts III 19 Sep '07

19 Sep '07

My apologies for missing Tuesday's meeting; I have been in hospital with a nasty case of some food-borne illness and am only now strong enough to sit up at a computer. I don't think I have a proper log of the meeting, and I still have a tonne of mail to go through. If the meeting hasn't been summarized yet, could someone take care of that for me? - J<

2 1

small typo on Packaging/SourceURL
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 19 Sep '07

19 Sep '07

There is a small typo at the bottom of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL in the section "Using %{version}". I guess it should read "..., because most of the time you do not _need_ to edit ...". Thanks, Jens

2 1

Packaging/ScriptletSnippets, fonts section: no "|| :" at the end of the fc-cache call?
by Thorsten Leemhuis 19 Sep '07

19 Sep '07

Hi all, the Fonts section on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets contains this: > Use this when your package installs new fonts. > > {{{ > %post > if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then > %{_bindir}/fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts > fi > %postun > if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then > if [ -x %{_bindir}/fc-cache ]; then > %{_bindir}/fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts > fi > fi > }}} Is there a specific reason why there is no "|| :" at the end of "%{_bindir}/fc-cache %{_datadir}/fonts"? I think there should be one, as this happened to me during a F-7 -> rawhide update (that's still in progress while I'm writing this mail, so more errors might show up): > Updating : bitstream-vera-fonts ################### [ 383/1850] > /usr/share/fonts/default/Type1: failed to write cache > /usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript: failed to write cache > error: %post(bitstream-vera-fonts-1.10-8.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 2 [...] > Updating : fontconfig ################### [ 416/1850] > /usr/share/fonts/default/Type1: failed to write cache > /usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript: failed to write cache > /usr/share/X11/fonts/Type1: failed to write cache > error: %post(fontconfig-2.4.2-5.fc8.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 3 [...] > Updating : dejavu-lgc-fonts ################### [ 548/1850] > /usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript: failed to write cache > error: %post(dejavu-lgc-fonts-2.19-1.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 1 > Updating : liberation-fonts ################### [ 549/1850] > /usr/share/fonts/default/ghostscript: failed to write cache > error: %post(liberation-fonts-0.2-1.fc8.noarch) scriptlet failed, exit status 1 CU knurd

5 5

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

packaging September 2007