fetchmail-devel

[fetchmail-devel] Re: [fetchmail-svn] r3905 - trunk/dist-tools/shipper

[Rob F. <rf...@fu...>]

Matthias Andree at BerliOS wrote:
> Modified:
>    trunk/dist-tools/shipper/buildrpms
> Log:
> Try fallback to rpm (in case rpm is version 3).
>
> -rpmbuild --rcfile "$RCFILE" $ARCH -ta $TARBALL
> +rpmbuild --rcfile "$RCFILE" $ARCH -ta $TARBALL \
> +|| rpm --rcfile "$RCFILE" $ARCH -ta $TARBALL

How old is rpm version 3?  Isn't it old enough to ignore by now?  Doesn't 
rpm v3 require building the rpm file as root?

One of my next steps was going to be removing the references to building 
the rpm as root.

-- 
==============================|   "A microscope locked in on one point
 Rob Funk <rf...@fu...> |Never sees what kind of room that it's in"
 http://www.funknet.net/rfunk |    -- Chris Mars, "Stuck in Rewind"

Re: [fetchmail-devel] Re: r3905 - trunk/dist-tools/shipper

[Rob F. <rf...@fu...>]

Matthias Andree wrote:
> RPM v3 is still in use on supported SuSE versions, for instance 8.2, and
> they have a nifty "patch RPM" feature for their online update - so it's
> not old enough yet unfortunately.

Bleh.

> I'm not aware of RPM requiring "root" - that's just a matter of
> permissions on directories and all that. RPM v3 supports BuildRoot and
> all that is needed.

Back when I ran Red Hat (around the same time I last programmed Berkeley 
DB :-), root was required for creating rpms so that the ownerships and 
permissions of the installed files would turn out right.  Eric's "go root 
to make the rpm" release procedure is a remnant of that era, even though 
things have changed since then.

> > One of my next steps was going to be removing the references to
> > building the rpm as root.
>
> I'm looking forward to those changes. :-)

Me too, but it'll have to wait until the end of the month.

-- 
==============================|   "A microscope locked in on one point
 Rob Funk <rf...@fu...> |Never sees what kind of room that it's in"
 http://www.funknet.net/rfunk |    -- Chris Mars, "Stuck in Rewind"

Re: [fetchmail-devel] Re: r3905 - trunk/dist-tools/shipper

[Matthias A. <ma...@dt...>]

Rob Funk <rf...@fu...> writes:

> Back when I ran Red Hat (around the same time I last programmed Berkeley 
> DB :-), root was required for creating rpms so that the ownerships and 
> permissions of the installed files would turn out right.  Eric's "go root 
> to make the rpm" release procedure is a remnant of that era, even though 
> things have changed since then.

Non-issue at least for RPM V3:

%files
%defattr(-,root,root)
bin/fetchmail
bin/fetchmailconf
...

I've committed a fix to specgen.sh that enables overrides for user,
name, domain and makes sure that date runs with C locale rather than
what I have configured - German month/week day names kill RPM in
%changelog.

-- 
Matthias Andree

Encrypted mail welcome: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95

Re: [fetchmail-devel] Re: [fetchmail-svn] r3905 - trunk/dist-tools/shipper

[Matthias A. <ma...@dt...>]

Rob Funk <rf...@fu...> writes:

> Matthias Andree at BerliOS wrote:
>> Modified:
>>    trunk/dist-tools/shipper/buildrpms
>> Log:
>> Try fallback to rpm (in case rpm is version 3).
>>
>> -rpmbuild --rcfile "$RCFILE" $ARCH -ta $TARBALL
>> +rpmbuild --rcfile "$RCFILE" $ARCH -ta $TARBALL \
>> +|| rpm --rcfile "$RCFILE" $ARCH -ta $TARBALL
>
> How old is rpm version 3?  Isn't it old enough to ignore by now?  Doesn't 
> rpm v3 require building the rpm file as root?

RPM v3 is still in use on supported SuSE versions, for instance 8.2, and
they have a nifty "patch RPM" feature for their online update - so it's
not old enough yet unfortunately.

I'm not aware of RPM requiring "root" - that's just a matter of
permissions on directories and all that. RPM v3 supports BuildRoot and
all that is needed.

> One of my next steps was going to be removing the references to building 
> the rpm as root.

I'm looking forward to those changes. :-)

-- 
Matthias Andree

Encrypted mail welcome: my GnuPG key ID is 0x052E7D95