On 8.3.2012 13:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 09:33 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> On 6.3.2012 16:40, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Jan Cholasta noticed that our upstream builder wasn't producing
>> experimental packages into the ipa-devel repository. This was due to the
>> builders not setting the enable_experimental variable. Patch 0003 in
>> this set now makes that the default in the spec file. I left it
>> conditionalized so that it's easy for other packagers to take the spec
>> and turn the experimental features back off.
>>
>> Patch 0001 makes a change that we made in Fedora some time ago to
>> properly handle filtering Provides: for our python library. The other
>> approach was long outdated and broke multilib on Fedora 17.
>
> Missing a caret and a backslash:
>
> %define __provides_exclude_from ^%{python_sitearch}.*\.so$
>
> Besides that, ACK.
>
The caret is not needed, according to
http://goo.gl/XDx76
(Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering)
However, you're right that the backslash should be there. Also, I need
to conditionalize this some more; RHEL5 doesn't have this macro, so we
still need to use the old version there.
New patch attached.
Forgot about a slash, it should probably be there as well:
%define __provides_exclude_from %{python_sitearch}/.*\.so$
>>
>> Patch 0002 is a cleanup patch to make the set of files we're installing
>> explicit, so we can easily catch mistakes. Previously we were installing
>> files by glob, which meant we could have missed some if we didn't notice
>> that they hadn't built.
>
> ACK.
>
>>
>> Patch 0003 makes building the experimental features the default for
>> 'make rpms'.
>>
>
> Please update the makefile too, "make rpms" and "make
experimental-rpms"
> now do exactly the same thing.
Thanks, fixed in new patch.
Is it OK to just remove experimental-rpms? Now there is no way to create
non-experimental rpms using make.
If it is OK, please also remove prerelease-experimental-rpms.
Honza
--
Jan Cholasta