gnupic@linuxhacker.org
gnupic@linuxhacker.org
I have reviewed the changes you suggested. I incorporated most of
them. Thanks.
Pehr Anderson wrote:
>
> Dear Craig,
>
> I'm not a packaging expert. I just wanted to share an approach
> that I found to be pleasing for my own projects.
>
> I agree that Red Hat has done a rotten job of documenting.
> I have struggled to learn and keep up with RPM best practice.
> The project I run is called Morseall, hosted at http://morseall.org
> I have only built i386 packages for various versions of Red Hat.
>
> My suggestions are largely derived from the Gnome 2 packages
> which have have their own quirks. I recently migrated Morseall
> to use the gtk2 libraries and learned about the their packaging
> changes as a result.
>
> I was pleased when I discovered the "rpmbuild -ta" feature.
> It had always seemed excessive to distribute a source RPM
> when the tar file already contained enough information to
> build binary RPMs.
>
> -pehr
>
> On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 09:25:31PM -0600, Craig Franklin wrote:
> > Thank you for the suggestion.
> >
> > The current setup doen't support extracting the spec file from the
> > archive. A slightly different set of commands are used.
> >
> > I have been fighting RPM for a while now. Certain build features seem
> > to come and go with each release of the tool. RedHat has done a truly
> > horrible job of documenting changes to the tool. It is really
> > frustrating. Sorry everybody, I had to vent a little.
> >
> > The setup in gputils is the only one that has worked for a extended
> > period of time.
> >
> > I will consider your changes. However, I may not make them. My
> > decision will be based on what is low risk and what will require the
> > least amount of my time.
> >
> > I am curious, are you building RPMs for other machines? If you are, I
> > may be more inclined to make the changes. If so, I will put a link on
> > the gputils website.
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> > Pehr Anderson wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Scott and friends,
> > >
> > > Gnupic looks great! I really like how it is packaged too!
> > >
> > > I just had a quick suggestion for
> > > improving the packaging of gputils-0.10.6
> > > in regards to building RPMS.
> > >
> > > It is really easy to make an RPM from a tar.gz file
> > > if things are setup right. I tried the following:
> > >
> > > rpmbuild -ta gnupic-0.10.6.tar.gz
> > >
> > > This gave an error. To make this work, I have the following
> > > suggestions that I tested on my own system.
> > >
> > > 1. rename gputils.spec to gputils.spec.in
> > > 2. In the file "configure.in",
> > > add gputils.spec to the AC_OUTPUT(...) section
> > > 3. Add the following section to Makefile.am for buidling the RPM
> > >
> > > TARFILE = @PACKAGE@-@VERSION@.tar.gz
> > > TARDIR = @PACKAGE@-@VERSION@
> > >
> > > rpm: clean
> > > -@echo "When building an rpm, we use prefix=/usr"
> > > echo "INSECURE USE OF /tmp DIRECTORY, but hey, it works..."
> > > mkdir -p /tmp/build/$(TARDIR)
> > > cp -a * /tmp/build/$(TARDIR)
> > > cd /tmp/build && tar czvf $(TARFILE) \
> > > --exclude $(TARFILE) \
> > > $(TARDIR)
> > > mv /tmp/build/$(TARFILE) .
> > > rm -rf /tmp/build/$(TARDIR)
> > > rpmbuild -ta $(TARFILE)
> > >
> > > 4. run "cp /usr/share/automake-1.6/depcomp . "
> > > 5. Now, rerun autoconf and automake to regenerate the "configure" file.
> > > If there are errors, make sure the text you pasted in the
> > > makefile contains only tabs and not spaces! Make is picky.
> > > Run "./configure"
> > > Then run "make rpm"
> > >
> > > The makefile addition isn't perfect. It makes an insecure use
> > > of temporary directories, but it works well for me.
> > >
> > > The main thing I want to suggest is steps 1 and 2 so that
> > > I can run "rpmbuild -ta xxx.tar.gz" and get a binary RPM.
> > >
> > > --pehr
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: gnupic-unsubscribe@linuxhacker.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: gnupic-help@linuxhacker.org
gnupic@linuxhacker.org