CMake out-of-source builds
by Brad Bell
On the web page
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_to_do_out-of-source_builds
the following text appears:
Targeted release: Fedora 33
I am testing output of source builds on Fedora 33 using the following command in a SPEC directory
rpmbuild -ba <package>.spec
where <package> is my package name.
When I run rpmbuild, the soruce code gets upacked in the directory
BUILD/<package>-<version>
where <version> is the package version, so I am trying the 'out of source build' with the following
in the spec file:
%cmake -S <package>-version -B cmake_dir ..
CMake appears to run correction and output its files in BUILD/cmake_dir.
One problem I am having is that I seem to need to put 'cd cmake_dir' directly after the '%cmake'
command or my make command fails ?
I also seem to have to put 'cd cmake_dir' other places ?
Another problem I am having is that an include sub-directory of the source directory
<package>-version needs to be installed
while the rest of the installed files are in the build directory cmake_dir.
I am not sure how to indicate this in the %files section of the spec file ?
2 months
Forgotten review request
by Andy Mender
Hello fellow Fedorians,
I'm a reviewer on this review request:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727506
The request was submitted last year, but then somehow forgotten by the
submitter. I still carried out the review as usual and would like to push
this forward.
What is the procedure for the re-assigning of a review request to the
reviewer? How do I then nominate a new reviewer for the request?
Cheers,
Andy
2 months, 3 weeks
Schedule for Thursday's FPC Meeting (2020-12-03 17:00 UTC)
by James Antill
Following is the list of topics that will be discussed in the FPC
meeting Thursday at 2020-12-03 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting-1 on
irc.freenode.net.
Local time information (via. uitime):
================= Day: Thursday ==================
2020-12-03 09:00 PST US/Pacific
2020-12-03 12:00 EST --> US/Eastern <--
2020-12-03 17:00 GMT Europe/London
2020-12-03 17:00 UTC UTC
2020-12-03 18:00 CET Europe/Berlin
2020-12-03 18:00 CET Europe/Paris
2020-12-03 22:30 IST Asia/Calcutta
---------------- New Day: Friday -----------------
2020-12-04 01:00 HKT Asia/Hong_Kong
2020-12-04 01:00 +08 Asia/Singapore
2020-12-04 02:00 JST Asia/Tokyo
2020-12-04 03:00 AEST Australia/Brisbane
Links to all tickets below can be found at:
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting
= Followup Actions =
#topic #pr-954
* King_InuYasha
talk to copr to get config. turned on
* tibbs
talk to releng to get config. turned on
#topic #pr-814
* mhroncok
talk to authors again, having a working example might help a lot
#topic Open Floor
* decathorpe
look through non-meeting tickets, see if any are stuck/need to be discussed
= Followup Issues =
#topic #907 Which %__foo macros for executables are acceptable?
.fpc 907
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/907
= Followup Pull Requests =
#topic #pr-814 Add SELinux Independent Policy Guidelines.
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/814
= Open Floor =
For more complete details, please visit each individual ticket. The
report of the agenda items can be found at:
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting
If you would like to add something to this agenda, you can:
* Reply to this e-mail
* File a new ticket at: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee
* E-mail me directly
* Bring it up at the end of the meeting, during the open floor topic. Note
that added topics may be deferred until the following meeting.
2 months, 3 weeks
packaging an alternate dictionary for cracklibs?
by Matthew Miller
The cracklibs-dict package is ... quite ... comprehensive. It weighs in at
almost 10MB on disk. Modern password guidance emphasizes length rather than
complicated checks, and this 10MB payload is increasingly irrelevant. I'd
like to provide an alternative, using a list of the 10,000 most common
passwords found in password breeches. This compresses down to about 1k, so
it's significant space savings, and may result in less user frustration
while still giving some real protection against the worst choices -- and
meeting security checklist items like "passwords checked against a
dictionary".
The problem is that cracklib seems to have a compile-time option for where
to find its dictionary. cracklib-dicts is already a subpackage, and a
cracklib-10k-worst or something alternative package could just be a drop-in
replacement... except of course it would conflict. Is this an okay use of
Conflicts? If not, what _should_ I do?
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
2 months, 3 weeks
