Hi, I'm currently packaging a robotics simulator called Morse
( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=770740 ). Morse allows its
simulations to be interacted with via multiple middleware protocols,
including sockets, YARP, pocolibs, ROS, and a few others. Upstream has
recommended that I extract support for these protocols into separate
subpackages, which seems very reasonable. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem
that we have packages for some of these middlewares.
So, what is the best course of action? I wouldn't really object to
writing up a few more packages for these most of these optional
dependencies. However, packaging ROS might be... problematic
( http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/robotics/2011/000529.html ),
and although an employee of their backer has indicated that he
has some interest, I wouldn't be surprised if it took a while.
I suppose one option would be to strip out the unsupported middleware,
until some point in the future when there is support, then
incrementally adding subpackages for each protocol.
Any advice would be much appreciated.
> Hi, I'm currently packaging a robotics simulator called Morse
> ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=770740 ). Morse allows its
> simulations to be interacted with via multiple middleware protocols,
> including sockets, YARP, pocolibs, ROS, and a few others. Upstream has
> recommended that I extract support for these protocols into separate
> subpackages, which seems very reasonable. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem
> that we have packages for some of these middlewares.
> Any advice would be much appreciated.
We had a similar issue for the packaging of SOCI (
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/soci), which is an
abstraction layer on top of third-party database back-ends/libraries,
including some not well supported by Fedora or even proprietary (Oracle).
So, we used "%bcond_with oracle" rules, translating into "--with/--without
oracle" options on the rpmbuild command-line. You can have a look at the
RPM specification file:
more details. In other terms, while mainstream Fedora does not provide
the Oracle sub-package, anyone can easily build the RPM if he/she has all
the necessary software stack and rights to use on his/her environment.
Hope it helps.
I would like to spin-off a package which is now a sub-package of another
Bacula contains 4mb of code and 40mb of docs; I would like to split them
[slaanesh@3zpc0560 bacula]$ ls -alghs *tar*
3,9M -rw-rw-r--. 1 slaanesh 3,9M 19 dic 09.16 bacula-5.2.3.tar.gz
40M -rw-rw-r--. 1 slaanesh 40M 19 dic 09.16 bacula-docs-5.2.3.tar.bz2
Everything is rebuilt every time there's the need to apply any change;
while the docs are usually static for each release. With all the testing
done for rawhide and the rebuilding of the same packages for RHEL 4/5/6 and
Fedora 16 I lost a lot of time doing uploads for scratch builds and
mock/koji rebuilds; so I would like to get away from this. Also RHEL 4 and
5 do not allow you to specify a separate BuildArch in a subpackage; which
make "x86_64" pointless as an arch for a package containing PDF files.
bacula-docs does not really need to be part of the main package, and apart
from good packaging, rpmlint checks and packaging guidelines what is needed
to make a spinoff of the package in Fedora?
Following the same approach; after the docs I would also like to package
"bacula-gui" which is not yet packaged in Fedora; but that count as a
I have already prepared the separate packages on my laptop.
Thanks & happy new year to everybody.
You cannot discover new oceans unless you have the courage to lose sight of
the shore (R. W. Emerson).