Fwd: [Fedora-packaging] %license for EPEL6

[Stephen John Smoogen]

This was on the packaging list but effects EPEL. Any suggestions?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thomas Moschny 
Date: 17 March 2015 at 10:59
Subject: [Fedora-packaging] %license for EPEL6
To: Fedora Packaging list

I have a package that can be build on all Fedora branches and on EPEL
6 and 7 with the same spec file. It uses

%{!?_pkgdocdir: %global _pkgdocdir %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}}

and copies all docs to this %_pkgdocdir. This works fine.

Now how should I handle licenses? On EPEL6, %license is not defined,
neither is %_licensedir.
One possibility is to use

%{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}

but that would violate the (fresh) packaging guideline mandating usage
of either %_pkgdocdir or %doc, but not both in the same specfile.
Any other suggestions?

- Thomas
--
packaging mailing list
[e-mail]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

[Paul Howarth]

On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:34:10 -0600
Stephen John Smoogen  wrote:
> This was on the packaging list but effects EPEL. Any suggestions?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Thomas Moschny 
> Date: 17 March 2015 at 10:59
> Subject: [Fedora-packaging] %license for EPEL6
> To: Fedora Packaging list
>
> I have a package that can be build on all Fedora branches and on EPEL
> 6 and 7 with the same spec file. It uses
>
> %{!?_pkgdocdir: %global _pkgdocdir %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}}
>
> and copies all docs to this %_pkgdocdir. This works fine.
>
> Now how should I handle licenses? On EPEL6, %license is not defined,
> neither is %_licensedir.
> One possibility is to use
>
> %{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc}
>
> but that would violate the (fresh) packaging guideline mandating usage
> of either %_pkgdocdir or %doc, but not both in the same specfile.
> Any other suggestions?

I have a similar issue in libpng10:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/libpng10.git/tree/libpng10.spec

Basically, I copy the license file into %_pkgdocdir like for any other
documentation on systems where %_licensedir isn't defined.

Paul.

[Simone Caronni]

On 17 March 2015 at 20:08, Paul Howarth  wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:34:10 -0600
> Stephen John Smoogen  wrote:
> > This was on the packaging list but effects EPEL. Any suggestions?
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Thomas Moschny 
> > Date: 17 March 2015 at 10:59
> > Subject: [Fedora-packaging] %license for EPEL6
> > To: Fedora Packaging list
> >
> > I have a package that can be build on all Fedora branches and on EPEL
> > 6 and 7 with the same spec file. It uses
>
> Basically, I copy the license file into %_pkgdocdir like for any other
> documentation on systems where %_licensedir isn't defined.

I'm using this really nice trick (it was posted by someone here in the list
in the past months):

http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/bacula.git/tree/bacula.spec#n583

I'm building the same SPEC file on all RHEL/CentOS/Fedora releases.

Regards,
--Simone