November 2013 - nodejs - Fedora Mailing-Lists

by fedora-badges

#311: Node.js guidelines update -----------------------------+------------------ Reporter: patches | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: Guideline Draft | Version: Keywords: | Blocked By: Blocking: | -----------------------------+------------------ We have a couple of changes we'd like to make to the Node.js Guidelines after several months of refining our processes a little bit. You can see the new draft at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS The changes include: * I've restored the %nodejs_fixdep section included in the original version of the draft. After reviewing the IRC logs, it seemed FPC didn't strongly object to this, and I believe it has several advantages to patch- based workflows. Not only is it simpler for packagers, but it also makes them dead simple to audit later on for staleness/compliance/whathaveyou. (`grep -r nodejs_fixdep` is just a lot easier than trying to find relevant patches. ;-) It also makes changes to dependencies much easier to see in git. [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS#Correc... (relevant section)] [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/... (diff)] * The RPM magic was recently split into it's own "nodejs-packaging" SRPM, similar to Java. Accordingly, packages can now require "nodejs-packaging" instead of "nodejs-devel" to reduce the number of deps dragged in at build-time. [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS#BuildR... (relevant section)] [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/... (diff #1)] [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/... (diff #2)] [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/nodejs/2013-April/000001.html (list discussion)] * The necessary ExclusiveArch line needed for Node.js packages is now documented, including the %{nodejs_arches} macro recently added to redhat- rpm-config for this purpose. [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS#Exclus... (new section)] [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/nodejs/2013-May/000017.html (list discussion)] * A strategy for handling multiple/compatibility versions of packages that is transparent to dependent packagers has been implemented. [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS#Handli... (new section)] [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/nodejs/2013-June/000032.html (list discussion)] * The %{nodejs_default_filter} default automatic virtual provides filtering macro (similar to Perl's) is now documented. [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS#Filter... (new section)] * A --check argument was added to %nodejs_symlink_deps simplify running test suites in specs. [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/NodeJS#.25check (new section)] * A brief mention that additional virtual provides are added for native modules to track ABI compatibility was added. [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/... (diff)] * Some minor edits were made to the installing native modules section to reflect reality; my initial draft contained errors. [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/... (diff)] * A brief note about an additional macro required to enable dependency generation on EPEL was added. [https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Patches/PackagingDrafts/... (diff)] I'd like to thank the fledgling Node.js SIG, including Stephen Gallager, Jamie Nguyen, Tom Hughes, and Stanislav Ochotnicky for their valuable bug catching, feedback, and suggestions, without which none of this would be possible. And, also the FPC in advance for reviewing our changes, of course. ;-) -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/311> fpc <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Committee> Fedora Packages Collection Task Tracking

9 years, 3 months

3
6
0 / 0

[HEADSUP] npm in EPEL broken due to rel-eng issue

by T.C. Hollingsworth

npm currently has broken dependencies in EPEL 6 because of what appears to be a rel-eng issue: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5657 Ordinarily I'd unpush that update but I'd rather wait for rel-eng's advice since something strange seems to have gone wrong here. -T.C.

9 years, 5 months

3
7
0 / 0

xmlbuilder

by Tom Hughes

I need to package the xmlbuilder module (it's a new dependency for another module I own) but packaging it has raised some interesting questions. The javascript source in the npm package, which is what the packaging guidelines tell us to use as the source, is compiled from coffee script and also doesn't include any source. We've worked around similar situations in the past by having a second source archive which contains the tests pulled from github, but in this case there's an extra issue - the tests work on the original coffee script source not the compiled javascript. In any case the coffee script is the real source, so shouldn't I really be packaging the github tar ball and building the js from that as part of the rpm? Tom -- Tom Hughes (tom(a)compton.nu) http://compton.nu/

9 years, 6 months

3
2
0 / 0

njs2rpm - NodeJS to RPM made simple, RedHat compatible

by Sérgio Freire

Hi all, Just to let you know of "njs2rpm", a NodeJS to RPM converter that tries to follow the RH/Fedora packaging guidelines and more! See the project page for more relevant info. https://github.com/sfreire/njs2rpm All made in Bash, without weird dependencies and (.spec) template based. Features: - supports RHEL6 and RHEL5/Centos5 (yes, RHEL5!) - runs and build RPM packages on these systems - simple creation of RPM obtaining sources directly from NPM Registry, of any package and version available! - does not require Perl, Python, Ruby and a bulk of dependencies in order to run! It's made in shell script: "BASH" to the rescue! - supports NodeJS packaging guidelines used in Fedora/EPEL (and upcoming RedHat versions) for building clean ("single") packages - supports the creation of "bundle" packages with all dependencies pre-bundled, overcoming the "limitation" of some modules with dependency problems! - supports RPM (or .spec) creation based on template files in order to customized the generated RPM Examples: njs2rpm uglify-js 2.4.1 1 single rpm njs2rpm uglify-js 2.4.1 1 bundle rpm njs2rpm express 3.4.4 1 bundle spec mytemplate.n2r PS: a .spec is provided along with a Makefile and a "mock" script, whatever you prefer. Regards, Sergio Freire

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

NodeJS 0.10.21 and newer on RHEL/Centos 5

by Sérgio Freire

Hi all, Just to let you know of my work on building NodeJS for RHEL5 (or similar) distributions. Please checkout https://github.com/sfreire/nodejs-rpm-centos5/ . It is based on previous work by the community but I rearranged it in order to be very similar to the EPEL 6 RPMs available in terms of packages and dependencies provided Regards, Sergio Freire

9 years, 7 months

1
0
0 / 0

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

nodejs November 2013