jquery bundling for new packages
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen
TIL that there are around a thousand packages
in Fedora that include a file named jquery.js... [1]
Anyway it is good to see efforts to tackle these kinds of problems
with the Javascript and Web Assets Guidelines. :)
I want to ask if the packaging of grunt and jquery
blocks current package reviews of packages that bundle jquery.js?
Or can they proceed for now until jquery is actually packaged in Fedora?
Jens
ps It is going to be a long cleanup process to fix all those packages with bundled files.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Web_Assets#Web_application_packagers
9 years, 7 months
Use of %__isa_bits should be mandatory
by Marcin Juszkiewicz
Hi
I am working on porting Fedora for AArch64 architecture. This means
patching many packages and during that time I noticed lot of checks for
32/64-bit architectures.
Most common one is:
%global something 32
%ifarch x86_64 ppc64 s390
%global something 64
%endif
Which can be now replaced to simple:
%global something %{__isa_bits}
And this works fine in Fedora 19 and beyond (including RHEL 7). There
are also some other variations of 32/64-bit checks which could be converted.
Can use of %__isa_bits be somehow announced/suggested to developers?
Would cut amount of patching needed for each new architecture.
9 years, 8 months
packaging one package with 2 frontends
by Sérgio Basto
Hi, I'm going open a revieww request for peazip
http://www.serjux.com/peazip/
I got 2 specs one for gtk2 other for qt , peazip.spec [1] I use
%global widgetset qt
or
%global widgetset gtk2
and in %build
lazbuild --lazarusdir=%{_libdir}/lazarus \
%ifarch x86_64
--cpu=x86_64 \
%endif
--widgetset=%{widgetset} \
-B project_pea.lpi project_peach.lpi project_gwrap.lpi
it is possible build qt and gtk2 in same spec / package ? how ?
Thanks,
[1] http://www.serjux.com/peazip/peazip.spec
--
Sérgio M. B.
9 years, 10 months
Upgrade path for Beta releases
by Mario Blättermann
Hi all,
currently I'm working on Kbarcode, which is under review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001799
The current version is 3.0.0b3. No problem so far, but the next one will
probably be the final 3.0.0. This way I don't get a proper upgrade path. Just
tested with a dummy package versioned as 3.0.0b2 which I tried to update with
3.0.0:
# rpm -Uvh mario-3.0.0-1.fc19.noarch.rpm
Preparing...
################################# [100%]
package mario-3.0.0b3-1.fc19.noarch (which is newer than
mario-3.0.0-1.fc19.noarch) is already installed
What to do in this case? I would add
Obsoletes: %{name} = 3.0.0b3
Is this OK or have to do some other fixes? Maybe I could change the package
version of the current beta release to 2.9.99?
Best Regards,
Mario
9 years, 10 months
Summary/Minutes from today's FPC Meeting (2013-11-21 17:00 - 19:00 UTC)
by James Antill
======================
#fedora-meeting-1: fpc
======================
Meeting started by abadger1999 at 17:04:14 UTC. The full logs are
available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-21/fedora-meeti...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Roll Call (abadger1999, 17:04:27)
* SCLs (abadger1999, 17:06:37)
* LINK: https://bugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1164#c7
(abadger1999, 17:07:28)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/363 (kkeithley_,
17:28:32)
* 363 exception for bundled library libntirpc in nfs-ganesha
(abadger1999, 17:29:31)
* Temporary bundling exception for libntirpc in nfs-ganesha until
after Fedora 23 approved (+1:5, 0:1, -1:0) (abadger1999, 17:34:38)
* #358 Please make some autotools guidelines. (abadger1999,
17:35:59)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/358 (abadger1999,
17:36:03)
* ACTION: abadger1999 to write up some guidelines based on past FPC
decisions. It will allow both strategies. (abadger1999, 17:45:25)
* 359 Forbid sysv initscripts in addition to systemd unit files
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/359 (abadger1999, 17:46:59)
* "Packagers MUST NOT include SysV initscripts in addition to systemd
unit files, even in a separate <code>$name-sysvinit</code>
subpackage." Approved (+1:5, 0:0, -1:1) (abadger1999, 18:07:30)
* #361 Two more bundled MD5 implementations (abadger1999, 18:07:42)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/361 (abadger1999,
18:07:46)
* New Virtual Provide for C++ port of deutsch's md5 code:
bundled(md5-deutsch-c++) passed: (+1:5, 0:0, -1:0) (abadger1999,
18:15:42)
* 362 lpf in Fedora (abadger1999, 18:16:20)
* #364 exception for bundled library ccan in ocserv (abadger1999,
18:17:27)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/364 (abadger1999,
18:17:31)
* LINK: http://ccodearchive.net/ (abadger1999, 18:18:13)
* LINK:
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~tangent-trunk/libmemcached/1.2/view/head:/li...
(geppetto, 18:35:18)
* LINK: http://burtleburtle.net/bob/c/lookup3.c <= original for that
code (abadger1999, 18:38:58)
* Open Floor (abadger1999, 18:47:54)
Meeting ended at 18:55:41 UTC.
Action Items
------------
* abadger1999 to write up some guidelines based on past FPC decisions.
It will allow both strategies.
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* abadger1999
* abadger1999 to write up some guidelines based on past FPC decisions.
It will allow both strategies.
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* abadger1999 (162)
* geppetto (58)
* RemiFedora (36)
* limburgher (23)
* tibbs|w (22)
* racor (17)
* kkeithley_ (6)
* zodbot (4)
* sgallagh (3)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
9 years, 10 months
SCL discussion at yesterday's meeting, easy stuff
by Toshio Kuratomi
This is mostly just me reporting things were decided and things that the FPC
seems to have decided on so I'm going to go forward with the draft assuming
that this is how things are going to be. I'll send out separate emails for
the other things discussed so we can discuss them in isolation.
== Partial approval ==
FPC approved this portion of the draft:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/SCL_Guidelines_(draft)#SCL_App...
minus the SCL Retirement section. The reason for not approving that section
is that it's not finalized yet. That section will likely be voted on at
next week's meeting so if you have comments on improving it, please let me
know (IRC or an {{admon/question|| Comment}} in the draft will assure that
I see your comment. This mailing list will let others participate in
a discussion. I recommend doing both :-)
== Filesystem Location ==
A straw poll was taken about the filesystem location of SCLs. A few FPC
members were willing to use /opt but others were heavily opposed to it.
Everyone was okay with using /usr/scl (or the plural form /usr/scls). So
I think that needs to become the scl root dir (is that the right term?) for
Fedora.
FPC was okay with the idea that third parties might use /usr/scl as well.
I didn't bring this up at the meeting but one thing that influences me on
this is that scls are inherently rpm managed and therefore mixing both our
scls with third party scls does not seem like the same vendor-OS problem
that /opt was designed to fix.
The location does need to include a vendor identifier. at the meeting we
discussed /usr/scl/$vendor/$scl_name/ but if the vendor string made its way
into the $scl_name I don't think people would object to /usr/scl/$scl_name
(scl_name is like fdr-ruby1.9.3).
-Toshio
9 years, 10 months
Summary/Minutes from today's FPC Meeting (2013-11-14 17:00 - 19:10 UTC)
by James Antill
======================
#fedora-meeting-1: fpc
======================
Meeting started by abadger1999 at 17:00:29 UTC. The full logs are
available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2013-11-14/fedora-meeti...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Roll Call (abadger1999, 17:00:41)
* #339 software collections in Fedora (abadger1999, 17:03:44)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/339 (abadger1999,
17:03:49)
* #352 BLAS and LAPACK packaging (abadger1999, 17:10:14)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/352 (abadger1999,
17:10:19)
* Approved (+1:6, 0:0, -1:0) FPC favors using environment modules for
this as it seems to avoid the problem of applications which might
want to link to one blas implementation but a dependent library is
linked to another. If someone would present us with a draft based
on that we'll be happy to review and vote on it. (abadger1999,
17:25:01)
* #355 How to package noarch packages which require a binary
dependency which doesn't build on all archs? (abadger1999, 17:25:24)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/355 (abadger1999,
17:25:29)
* Noarch_with_unported_dependencies minus the paragraph specifying the
fail-and-resubmit option passed (+1:7, 0:0, -1:0) (abadger1999,
17:47:53)
* #357 time-api prior to openJDK8 (abadger1999, 17:48:08)
* 365 New virtual Provides for javax time-api (abadger1999, 17:51:31)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/365 (abadger1999,
17:51:36)
* virtual provides for java8's time api granted (+1:7, 0:0, -1:0)
(abadger1999, 17:53:09)
* 366 Should we hand enabling third party repositories back to fesco?
(abadger1999, 17:53:59)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/366 (abadger1999,
17:54:03)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/671 (abadger1999,
17:56:37)
* LINK:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2006-October/msg00132.html
(abadger1999, 17:57:40)
* LINK: http://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-extras/msg30902.html
(tibbs|w, 18:01:24)
* Proposal (See ticket
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/366#comment:1) Is currently
(+1:4, 0:1, -1:0) will ask for more votes in ticket. (abadger1999,
18:55:04)
* Open Floor (abadger1999, 18:55:12)
* #363 exception for bundled library libntirpc in nfs-ganesha
(abadger1999, 18:56:22)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/363 (abadger1999,
18:56:32)
* Open Floor (abadger1999, 19:01:23)
* #362 lpf should not be allowed in Fedora (abadger1999, 19:02:15)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/362 (abadger1999,
19:02:20)
* lpf is okay for Fedora, lpf-* packages should move to a more
appropriate repo Needs more votes: (+1:3, 0:0, -1:0) (abadger1999,
19:07:41)
* 363 exception for bundled library libntirpc in nfs-ganesha
(abadger1999, 19:07:59)
* Temporary bundling exception for libntirpc in nfs-ganesha until
after Fedora 23 -- need more votes in ticket (+1:4, 0:0, -1:0)
(abadger1999, 19:10:24)
* Open Floor (abadger1999, 19:10:44)
Meeting ended at 19:11:27 UTC.
Action Items
------------
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* abadger1999 (182)
* geppetto (68)
* spot (57)
* tibbs|w (48)
* limburgher (47)
* jwb (28)
* RemiFedora (28)
* Rathann (15)
* zodbot (8)
* kkeithley_ (8)
* leamas (8)
* racor (7)
* nirik (3)
* sgallagh (1)
* gholms (1)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
9 years, 10 months