#136 configure RPM spec file integration

closed-accepted
nobody
None
5
2009-06-07
2009-06-06
Joachim Metz
No

Related to patch 2579743 I have added the files/patches necessary to add RPM spec file integration to the configure scripts.
I also have added an updated spec file for 0.4.0

Discussion

  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-06

    Spec file updated for 0.4.0

     
    Attachments
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-06

    input spec file for configure

     
    Attachments
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-06

    Patch

     
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-06

    Instructions:

    1. add the spec.in and spec file to the package directory
    2. apply the patch (or make the changes by hand) to configure.in and Makefile.am
    3. update the autoconf/make scripts
    4. make a dist, the package should now contain a spec file with the right version of the package

    Note that any changes to the spec file, i.e. location changes, should be made in the spec.in file.

     
  • Jaka Kranjc
    Jaka Kranjc
    2009-06-07

    Our spec file was already bumped to 0.4.0, as part of the release process. You've done the change over some old file that even squashes some of your own changes. If there is something important for the spec, please provide a separate patch (but I doubt it, since now it will be auto-generated).

    spec.in is also based on an old spec. From history, it sounds like they would install the *.la files.

     
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-07

    The spec or spec.in file themselves are not that important, in this case
    I provided it to signify the differences between the spec and spec.in file

    there is just one autoconf macro in the spec.in file namely:
    Version: @VERSION@

    This macro does the trick for the package version, more macros can be added if required.

     
  • Jaka Kranjc
    Jaka Kranjc
    2009-06-07

    That's no news to me. I was pointing out that the spec{,.in} is old and that may not be what you want.

     
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-07

    > I was pointing out that the spec{,.in} is old and that may not be what you want.
    Thanks, but I couldn't find a spec file in the 0.4.0 source package.
    Or is it only available in SVN ?
    So I just used an old spec file as an example

    > That's no news to me.
    I'll assume you have the necessary information to add the new autogenerated spec file to the package.

    Just close this tracker request.

     
  • Jaka Kranjc
    Jaka Kranjc
    2009-06-07

    It was updated before the release (cf. previous bug), but it wasn't in EXTRA_DIST, so the tarball doesn't have it. :/ Your patch fixes that. :)

    Btw, is there any sense in keeping gemrb.spec in the repo or installing it? It seems to me it can be deleted and the name removed from SPEC_FILES.

     
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-07

    Yes there is sense in keeping the .spec file in the source package. The .spec file is kept in the dist because that is the file necessary to create an RPM directly from the source package using rpmbuild -ta <file>.

    If you only keep the .spec.in you'll need to first unpack the source package, run configure (generate the spec file), repackage and then are able to run rpmbuild -ta <file>. In conclusion the .spec.in is mainly intended for generating a package specific .spec file which is necessary for building an RPM directly from the source package.

     
  • Jaka Kranjc
    Jaka Kranjc
    2009-06-07

    I asked about the repository, I understand you need it in the tarball. But they'll get there via make dist and the .in template, right? So I see no point in keeping some old generated or parallely updated spec in the subversion repository.
    I also tried to convey that I don't think it is useful for either of them to be part of the make install target.

     
  • Joachim Metz
    Joachim Metz
    2009-06-07

    > I asked about the repository
    Over looked that one, sorry about that. You're right, no need for duplicates or generated files in the repo.

    > I also tried to convey that I don't think it is useful for either of them to be part of the make install target.
    No need for that either.
    However the SPEC_FILES definition is just a place holder; it should not install the files.
    You could also directly add the files to EXTRA_DIST.

     
  • Jaka Kranjc
    Jaka Kranjc
    2009-06-07

    • status: open --> closed-accepted
     
  • Jaka Kranjc
    Jaka Kranjc
    2009-06-07

    added to trunk, thanks.