Change to bundlebuilder breaking Sugar packaging guidelines?

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

Hi folks.  I've been working on My Very Own First Activity (yaaay!) but 
ran into some problems (boooo.)

So I'm trying to package XoIRC, and thanks to dgilmore's help, I finally 
got it to build, but it looks like a change in bundlebuilder's behavior 
has led to some... oddness.  Speficially this bit:

def install(self, prefix):
         self.builder.build()
         activity_path = os.path.join(prefix, 'share', 'sugar',
                                      'activities',
                                      self.config.bundle_root_dir)

Which means a couple of things.

First, the proper %install section, which once looked like this:

rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{sugaractivitydir}
python setup.py install $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{sugaractivitydir}

...now appears to look like this:

rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{sugaractivitydir}
python setup.py install --prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_prefix}

I'm surprised that no one has found this -- I don't know when those 
changes to bundlebuilder went in, but anyone who would have tried to build 
a new activity RPM using the old invocation of setup.py would have gotten 
breakage.

In fact, I think this implies that anyone who rebuilds any newly-rebuilt 
bundle *will* get this breakage... am I right?

What was the reason for this addition to bundlebuilder, does anyone know?

I'm going to change the Sugar packaging guidelines here:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SugarActivityGuidelines

...unless someone tells me that bundlebuilder's new behavior is in error.

--g

--
Got an OLPC that you're not using?  Loan it to a needy developer!
   [[ http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO_Exchange_Registry ]]