Packaging RPM presentation

[Shakthi Kannan]

Hi,

I have tried to make a simple presentation on packaging RPM. Can you
please go through the following, and let me know if I have missed
something, or there is anything that I overlooked (that needs
changes), or something that will be good to include in the following?
http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...

The sources are available at:
http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...

Thanks!

SK

-- 
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 05/10/2009 06:40 PM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
>  Hi,
>  
>  I have tried to make a simple presentation on packaging RPM. Can you
>  please go through the following, and let me know if I have missed
>  something, or there is anything that I overlooked (that needs
>  changes), or something that will be good to include in the following?
>
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
>  
>  The sources are available at:
>
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
Pretty good. Just a few notes:

You might want to look at

www.redhat.com/promo/summit/2008/downloads/pdf/Wednesday_130pm_Tom_Callaw...

License field is shortened and includes the version number, atleast in
the Fedora Packaging guidelines ex: GPLv2+

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines

You shouldn't need to pass --clean explicitly. Instead the spec file
should have a clean section

Ex:

---

%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

---

rpmls (part of rpmdevtools) can list packages without having to extract
them first with rpm2cpio directly.

Also, I prefer yum install <path/to/rpm> --nogpgcheck install of using
rpm directly just in case that the rpm has additional dependencies.

Also, I recommend users always create a separate user just for building
packages and then use mock (recommended) or alternatively rpmbuild just
as a safety measure. Also koji (the build system used by Fedora) has a
client which can be used for creating scratch builds.  If someone is
interested in Fedora specifically, they can get started with

# yum install fedora-packager (meta package that pulls in the usual
required tools)

Rahul

[Rakesh Pandit]

2009/5/10 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  On 05/10/2009 06:40 PM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have tried to make a simple presentation on packaging RPM. Can you
> > please go through the following, and let me know if I have missed
> > something, or there is anything that I overlooked (that needs
> > changes), or something that will be good to include in the following?
> >
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
> > 
@Shakti

Good presentation, Nice work ... are pictures used inside presentation
your own? Don't they need licensing ? I see this pattern similar to
famous Autotools pdf ;) which is very good.


>  rpmls (part of rpmdevtools) can list packages without having to extract
>  them first with rpm2cpio directly.
>  
It would be nice to add a brief description of rpm -q --qf
"[%{fileperm:perms} %{filenames}\n]" <package-name-in-db> or

rpm -qp --qf "[%{fileperm:perms} %{filenames}\n]"
<path/to/binary/file.rpm> and some small queries and then a mention of
rpmls (which is actually a query) or rpm-dev-extract for extracting
rpm content.

--
Regards,
Rakesh Pandit

[Shakthi Kannan]

Hi,

--- On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Rakesh Pandit
<rakesh.pandit(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
| Good presentation, Nice work ... are pictures used inside presentation
| your own?
\--

Yes, except, couple of them which are also under GNU FDL taken from
wikipedia.org.

---
| Don't they need licensing ?
\--

Yes, same as under GNU FDL.

---
I see this pattern similar to
| famous Autotools pdf ;) which is very good.
\--

Yes, the sources are LaTeX Beamer.

---
| rpmls (part of rpmdevtools) can list packages without having to extract
| them first with rpm2cpio directly.
\--

Updated in version 1.1.

---
| It would be nice to add a brief description of rpm -q --qf
| "[%{fileperm:perms} %{filenames}\n]" <package-name-in-db> or
|
| rpm -qp --qf "[%{fileperm:perms} %{filenames}\n]"
| <path/to/binary/file.rpm>
\--

I shall skip this for now. I have provided lot of reference links in
the presentation. The idea is to get people started, and once they
have the self-confidence, and self-belief, they can start to explore
more macros, wiki documentation, and also communicate in the channels
for packaging queries and support.

Thanks for your feedback,

SK

-- 
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com

[Shakthi Kannan]

Hi,

--- On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Rahul Sundaram
<sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
| License field is shortened and includes the version number, atleast in
| the Fedora Packaging guidelines ex: GPLv2+
\--

Updated.

---
| You shouldn't need to pass --clean explicitly. Instead the spec file
| should have a clean section
\--

Ok. The .spec file has one. I put it so that people know there is a
automatic clean option. In subsequent slides, I have highlighted the
cleaning that takes place in the output.

---
| rpmls (part of rpmdevtools) can list packages
\--

Now the slide uses rpmls.

---
| Also, I prefer yum install <path/to/rpm> --nogpgcheck install of using
| rpm directly just in case that the rpm has additional dependencies.
\--

Updated.

---
| Also, I recommend users always create a separate user just for building
| packages and then use mock (recommended)
\--

Updated in a new 'Notes' slide.

---
| Also koji (the build system used by Fedora) has a
| client which can be used for creating scratch builds.
\--

Have now provided link to Koji documentation.

---
| # yum install fedora-packager (meta package that pulls in the usual
| required tools)
\--

Updated. Have also mentioned about "# %foo" in the Notes slide. Please
use version 1.1. Thanks for your feedback.

SK

-- 
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 05/10/2009 08:34 PM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:

>  Updated. Have also mentioned about "# %foo" in the Notes
> slide. Please
>  use version 1.1. Thanks for your feedback. 
A few more notes:

Source0 should point to the upstream url (ie) something like

http://shakthimaan.com/source/foo-1.1.tar.bz2

That's important because in most cases, you are packaging something
written by another developer and others should be able to verify that
the tarball matches what is provided by the upstream project.

Fedora routinely runs source url checks as part of the QA process. If it
fails, it is flagged for manual review.

Also, any non-trivial package would have a non-empty BuildRequires and
Requires section. While GCC and other core utilities are part of the
default build root in Fedora, it can be included as a BR for the sake of
the example or perhaps it would be ideal to include a second example
with those.

Also you should include a README in the tarball and introduce %doc macro
in your sample spec file.

The macros section in your slide can refer to

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros

In your notes, you should mention it is possible to define a custom
macro easily in the spec file and many package do make use of them
routinely. For example, the python packaging guidelines in Fedora state
that python package should start with pyfoo or python-foo when upstream
is named foo and I defined a custom macro

%define upstreamname foo

and used that in my spec file.

Also distributions tend to use custom macros either within particular
package types (Fedora font packages use font specific macros and the
macros are defined in /etc/rpm/macros.fonts, part of fontpackages-devel
package which is specified as a BR for all fonts) or system wide. The
Fedora system wide macros are defined by /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros
which is part of redhat-rpm-config package.

Hope that helps.

Rahul

[Shakthi Kannan]

Hi,

--- On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Rahul Sundaram
<sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
| Source0 should point to the upstream url (ie) something like
|
| http://shakthimaan.com/source/foo-1.1.tar.bz2
|
| That's important because in most cases, you are packaging something
| written by another developer and others should be able to verify that
| the tarball matches what is provided by the upstream project.
\--

* Updated to use:
Source0:
http://www.shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentation/%{name}-%{version}....

* Updated setup to also use:
%prep
%setup -qn %{name}

* Install now includes only fedora-packager.

---
| While GCC and other core utilities are part of the
| default build root in Fedora, it can be included as a BR for the sake of
| the example or perhaps it would be ideal to include a second example
| with those.
\--

I saw the following and hence didn't give it in the example:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2

I have now mentioned the URL.

---
| Also you should include a README in the tarball and introduce %doc macro
| in your sample spec file.
\--

Updated. Outputs as well.

---
| The macros section in your slide can refer to
|
| http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros
\--

Updated.

---
| For example, the python packaging guidelines in Fedora state
| that python package should start with pyfoo or python-foo when upstream
| is named foo and I defined a custom macro
|
| %define upstreamname foo
|
| and used that in my spec file.
\--

Added another slide for macros, and have illustrated this example.
Some fixes in macro definitions as well. Use version 1.2.

I believe this should be sufficient to get started with, and
subsequent use-cases for various packaging guidelines can be done in a
hands-on workshop with support from wiki documentation, discussion on
mailing lists, and IRC.

Thanks a lot for the valuable feedback.

SK

-- 
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com

[Gireesh Sreekantan]

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Shakthi Kannan <shakthimaan(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  I believe this should be sufficient to get started with, and
>  subsequent use-cases for various packaging guidelines can be done in a
>  hands-on workshop with support from wiki documentation, discussion on
>  mailing lists, and IRC.
>  
First, let me appreciate you on the great work done! And yes, I love
humor :-)  My RPM building and usage skills would probably fit a
single postcard yet l I felt quite comfortable reading it through.

I know I am bit late to respond but I feel a little differentiation
between user input and system generated output (in terms of color or
font) would be helpful.

-- 
Gireesh

[Shakthi Kannan]

Hi,

--- On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Gireesh <sgireeshmail(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
| First, let me appreciate you on the great work done! And yes, I love
| humor :-)
\--

Thanks!

---
| My RPM building and usage skills would probably fit a
| single postcard yet l I felt quite comfortable reading it through.
\--

That is _exactly_ what it is meant for.

---
| I know I am bit late to respond but I feel a little differentiation
| between user input and system generated output (in terms of color or
| font) would be helpful.
\--

The user input commands always have the "$" prompt in front of it. The
slides that show contents of files also include commands, but, they
are not invoked directly.

I am using the default presentation, colour themes (.sty), and haven't
had time to play with it, yet. Thanks for your feedback.

Regards,

SK

-- 
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 05/10/2009 06:40 PM, Shakthi Kannan wrote:
>  Hi,
>  
>  I have tried to make a simple presentation on packaging RPM. Can you
>  please go through the following, and let me know if I have missed
>  something, or there is anything that I overlooked (that needs
>  changes), or something that will be good to include in the following?
>
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
>  
>  The sources are available at:
>
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
Ah, one more thing, I would also like to see a gotchas section that
mentions things like

# %foo

will still cause the parser to ignore the # and process the macro anyway
which can lead to unexpected build results.

Rahul

[ElectroMech]

Good presentation and with excellent picture.

Can we distribute to any body.

Shakthi Kannan wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  I have tried to make a simple presentation on packaging RPM. Can you
>  please go through the following, and let me know if I have missed
>  something, or there is anything that I overlooked (that needs
>  changes), or something that will be good to include in the following?
>
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
>
>  The sources are available at:
>
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/packaging-red-hot-pane...
>
>  Thanks!
>
>  SK
>
>     

-- 
Nilesh Vaghela
ElectroMech
Redhat Channel Partner and Training Partner
16, Sun Rise complex,
Nr. Mansi cross Road,
Satellite Rd, Ahmedabad
25, The Emperor, Fatehgunj, Baroda.
www.electromech.info

[Shakthi Kannan]

Hi,

--- On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Nilesh J. Vaghela
<electromech(a)electromech.info&gt; wrote:
| Can we distribute to any body.
\--

Released under GNU FDL. Feel free!

SK

-- 
Shakthi Kannan
http://www.shakthimaan.com