[mingw32-glib2] Update to 2.26.0
by Erik van Pienbroek
commit 0021369e29abd673a876fb2418a41bfc482fede6
Author: Erik van Pienbroek <epienbro(a)fedoraproject.org>
Date: Tue Oct 12 00:20:57 2010 +0200
Update to 2.26.0
.gitignore | 1 +
mingw32-glib2.spec | 9 ++++++---
sources | 2 +-
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index 5ff245b..517f9c0 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -2,3 +2,4 @@ glib-2.24.1.tar.bz2
glib-2.25.12.tar.bz2
/glib-2.25.15.tar.bz2
/glib-2.25.17.tar.bz2
+/glib-2.26.0.tar.bz2
diff --git a/mingw32-glib2.spec b/mingw32-glib2.spec
index a73b921..08942ef 100644
--- a/mingw32-glib2.spec
+++ b/mingw32-glib2.spec
@@ -6,14 +6,14 @@
%define __debug_install_post %{_mingw32_debug_install_post}
Name: mingw32-glib2
-Version: 2.25.17
+Version: 2.26.0
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: MinGW Windows GLib2 library
License: LGPLv2+
Group: Development/Libraries
URL: http://www.gtk.org
-Source0: http://download.gnome.org/sources/glib/2.25/glib-%{version}.tar.bz2
+Source0: http://download.gnome.org/sources/glib/2.26/glib-%{version}.tar.bz2
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildArch: noarch
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ Group: Development/Libraries
Static version of the MinGW Windows GLib2 library.
-%{_mingw32_debug_package}
+%{?_mingw32_debug_package}
%prep
@@ -189,6 +189,9 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Oct 11 2010 Erik van Pienbroek <epienbro(a)fedoraproject.org> - 2.26.0-1
+- Update to 2.26.0
+
* Thu Sep 23 2010 Erik van Pienbroek <epienbro(a)fedoraproject.org> - 2.25.17-1
- Update to 2.25.17
diff --git a/sources b/sources
index 6f799f7..b7badb6 100644
--- a/sources
+++ b/sources
@@ -1 +1 @@
-335c448c05cff9c296b37f47eb019f3a glib-2.25.17.tar.bz2
+9b7dc61f5e389e1cff277a6350c37397 glib-2.26.0.tar.bz2
13 years, 7 months
Rewriting the Qt .spec file
by Erik van Pienbroek
Hi everybody,
The mingw32-qt.spec file which is currently used in Fedora uses a rather
unconventional method to build the package. This involves a script which
has to run on the packagers' host, runs Qt's configure.exe using wine
and generating a diff against a clean source directory. In the .spec
file itself only some folders are built.
As you can see this is a kinda hacked up method to get Qt compiled.
Yesterday, Kalev Lember mentioned in #fedora-mingw that as of Qt 4.7.0
support for cross-compiling should have been improved. So I decided to
try to rewrite the Qt .spec file. In the end I managed to get Qt
compiled without the hacks which were originally used. As a bonus
support for MMX and SSE optimizations has also been added. There still
are some patches which need to be applied, but most of it is
upstreamable.
During this rewrite I stumbled across some issues which I would like to
share with the list so we come to a solution which everybody agrees on.
In the original .spec file a mkspecs target was created called
'win32-fedora-cross'. People had to use the command 'qmake-qt4 -spec
win32-fedora-cross' to compile Qt applications using MinGW. During the
rewrite I noticed that Qt's build system interprets that name as a MSVC
toolchain based one. This resulted in errors where the linker was trying
to link to .lib files instead of .a files for example. GCC based
toolchains have to use the prefix 'win32-g++'. For now I've patched
around this limitation, but I think we should discuss changing it to a
new name as we should limit the number of patches required to an
absolute minimum.
Kalev mentioned another MinGW cross compiler project [1] which uses the
mkspecs name win32-g++-cross. I would like to propose that we switch to
that name as well for Fedora 14 and rawhide. There's also a mingw-w64
testing repository out there [2] which bundles Qt. For mingw-w64 I'd
like to propose the mkspecs name win32-g++-cross-x64. Discussion whether
these are good or bad names is welcome.
Next there's the issue about bundled libraries which is a hot topic on
the fedora-devel list these days. By default Qt bundles several
libraries in it's DLL's. Among these are zlib, libjpeg, libtiff, libpng
and openssl. We already have those libraries in the Fedora repositories.
Upstream's releases don't have any dependencies on these external
libraries as they're all bundled inside the Qt DLL's. So the question is
whether we should confirm to the way upstream wants it or the way Fedora
wants it. Comments are welcome.
As soon as we've agreed on these two questions I'll build the new Qt
package and push it to F14 and rawhide.
Kind regards,
Erik van Pienbroek
1. http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/mingw-cross-env
2.
http://www.mail-archive.com/mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org/msg00135.html
13 years, 7 months
[mingw32-filesystem] Provide mingw32(odbc32.dll) for Qt
by Erik van Pienbroek
commit bd51a55b1a886be7480dc4b07a3c103056b815a0
Author: Erik van Pienbroek <epienbro(a)fedoraproject.org>
Date: Mon Oct 11 20:41:36 2010 +0200
Provide mingw32(odbc32.dll) for Qt
mingw32-filesystem.spec | 6 +++++-
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
---
diff --git a/mingw32-filesystem.spec b/mingw32-filesystem.spec
index 6e3eb88..2c01f24 100644
--- a/mingw32-filesystem.spec
+++ b/mingw32-filesystem.spec
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
%define debug_package %{nil}
Name: mingw32-filesystem
-Version: 61
+Version: 62
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: MinGW base filesystem and environment
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ Provides: mingw32(setupapi.dll)
Provides: mingw32(rpcrt4.dll)
Provides: mingw32(ws2_32.dll)
Provides: mingw32(gdiplus.dll)
+Provides: mingw32(odbc32.dll)
%description
@@ -165,6 +166,9 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%changelog
+* Mon Oct 11 2010 Erik van Pienbroek <epienbro(a)fedoraproject.org> - 62-1
+- Provide mingw32(odbc32.dll) for Qt
+
* Sun Sep 12 2010 Erik van Pienbroek <epienbro(a)fedoraproject.org> - 61-1
- Provide mingw32(gdiplus.dll) for gdk-pixbuf
13 years, 7 months
[Bug 641727] Review Request: mingw32-libffi: portable foreign function interface library for Fedora MinGW
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641727
Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl
Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> 2010-10-11 12:58:37 EDT ---
$ rpmlint mingw32-libffi.spec
mingw32-libffi.spec:18: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 18, tab:
line 7)
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-libffi-3.0.9-1.fc14.src.rpm
mingw32-libffi.src:18: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 18, tab:
line 7)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-libffi-3.0.9-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmquery --requires mingw32-libffi
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
mingw32-filesystem >= 56
mingw32-runtime
mingw32(kernel32.dll)
mingw32(msvcrt.dll)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
$ rpmquery --provides mingw32-libffi
mingw32(libffi-5.dll)
mingw32-libffi = 3.0.9-1.fc14
$ rpmquery --fileprovide mingw32-libffi
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/libffi-5.dll
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libffi-3.0.9
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libffi-3.0.9/include
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libffi-3.0.9/include/ffi.h
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libffi-3.0.9/include/ffitarget.h
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libffi.dll.a
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libffi.la
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/libffi.pc
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libffi-3.0.9
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libffi-3.0.9/LICENSE
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libffi-3.0.9/README
$ curl ftp://sourceware.org/pub/libffi/libffi-3.0.9.tar.gz | md5sum
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current
Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed
100 714k 100 714k 0 0 144k 0 0:00:04 0:00:04 --:--:-- 169k
1f300a7a7f975d4046f51c3022fa5ff1 -
$ md5sum libffi-3.0.9.tar.gz
1f300a7a7f975d4046f51c3022fa5ff1 libffi-3.0.9.tar.gz
+ OK
! Needs to be looked into
/ Not applicable
* Overridden by MinGW guidelines
[+] Files are installed in /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw
[+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= xx is in the .spec file
[+] Requires are OK
[+] BuildArch: noarch
[+] No man pages or info files
[+] default strip and objdump commands are overridden with mingw32 specific
ones
[+] rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
[/] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.
[/] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[/] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[/] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[/] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[*] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[/] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[/] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[/] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[/] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[/] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[/] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[/] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See
MockTricks for details on how to do this.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
[/] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is
vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
[/] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[*] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and
this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[/] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
There's a small rpmlint warning about mixed spaces/tabs. Please fix this before
importing the package
====================================================
The package mingw32-libffi is APPROVED by epienbro
====================================================
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 7 months
[Bug 641726] Review Request: mingw32-libsigsegv: user mode page fault handling library for Fedora MinGW
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641726
Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora(a)vanpienbroek.nl> 2010-10-11 12:45:04 EDT ---
$ rpmlint mingw32-libsigsegv.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6-1.fc14.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmquery --requires mingw32-libsigsegv
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
mingw32-filesystem >= 56
mingw32-runtime
mingw32(kernel32.dll)
mingw32(msvcrt.dll)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1
$ rpmquery --provides mingw32-libsigsegv
mingw32(libsigsegv-0.dll)
mingw32-libsigsegv = 2.6-1.fc14
$ rpmquery --fileprovide mingw32-libsigsegv
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/libsigsegv-0.dll
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/sigsegv.h
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libsigsegv.dll.a
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libsigsegv.la
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6/AUTHORS
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6/COPYING
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6/NEWS
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libsigsegv-2.6/README
$ curl http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libsigsegv/libsigsegv-2.6.tar.gz | md5sum
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current
Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed
100 340k 100 340k 0 0 168k 0 0:00:02 0:00:02 --:--:-- 181k
7e24993730649d13c6eabc28bd24de35 -
$ md5sum libsigsegv-2.6.tar.gz
7e24993730649d13c6eabc28bd24de35 libsigsegv-2.6.tar.gz
+ OK
! Needs to be looked into
/ Not applicable
* Overridden by MinGW guidelines
[+] Files are installed in /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw
[+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= xx is in the .spec file
[+] Requires are OK
[+] BuildArch: noarch
[+] No man pages or info files
[+] default strip and objdump commands are overridden with mingw32 specific
ones
[+] rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
[/] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.
[/] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[/] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[/] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[/] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[*] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[/] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[/] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[/] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[/] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[/] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[/] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[/] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See
MockTricks for details on how to do this.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
[/] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is
vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
[/] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[*] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and
this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[/] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
========================================================
The package mingw32-libsigsegv is APPROVED by epienbro
========================================================
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
13 years, 7 months