On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:42 PM, Eric Griffith <egriffith92@gmail.com> wrote:

Hey everyone, first message to the mailing list and a new packager in
general. I've gone over the wiki and the docs but a few things are
still unclear to me.

1) rpmlint complains about source0 not being a valid URL, but it
rpmbuild can't find the source if I have it correct... Currently it
says:

Source0:
https://github.com/01org/thermal_daemon/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz

But when I do "rpmbuild -ba thermal_daemon.spec" (following Fedora
Documentation http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/index.html
) then rpmbuild complains about:

error: File /home/egriffith/rpmbuild/SOURCES/v1.30.tar.gz: No such
file or directory

presumably because its just looking at "v%{version}.tar.gz". What is
the appropriate fix here? The upstream source is in fact:

https://github.com/01org/thermal_daemon/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz (in
this case v1.30.tar.gz)

but the download link gives you "thermal_daemon-1.3.tar.gz" which is
in my SOURCES directory. So do I rename thermal_daemon-1.3.tar.gz to
be "v1.30.tar.gz" or do I modify "Source0" to not be 100% faithful to
the actual URL? Or is there an override I can use to specify that the
downloaded files have a different name than the upstream source URL

This part can be meh. So, generally you want the url path to be where someone could download the file directly, such as by using spectool (http://linuxmanpages.net/manpages/fedora21/man1/spectool.1.html).

There are some recommendations about making a source url with github.

See this bug: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/233 and the page it links to. I think the bug gives great background.

Also: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Spot/GitHub_Guidelines

I'm not a huge fan of the commit id portion, but whatever works i guess.

2) %build section. The original spec file had 'autoreconf' the
compilation instructions had ./autogen.sh. Which is the correct one to
use? Current spec uses autogen.sh

Use whatever your software needs/suggests. If you aren't compiling anything you can even leave %build blank.

3) Is a "BuildRequires: systemd" necessary or is it just redundant?

I believe its necessary. Even if it currently isn't, there is a lot of discussion right now that maybe people should be explicit even if something was assumed previously. I require it here:

https://github.com/rackerlabs/plight/blob/master/plight.spec#L31-L34

4) Can someone link or explain the Requires(post)/(preun)/(postun),
same with %post, %preun, %postun

Basically its defining a requirement for that package/software to be available during those steps, even if its not necessarily required once the RPM is installed. This page has some good explanations about each stage. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets

5) %files does every single file need to be listed here or just
'important ones? I left out /usr/share/src, /usr/lib and a couple
others.

All files that are included need to be listed. That being said globbing can be effective. I'd read through

http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-files-list-directives.html
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package/zh-tw#.25files_section

6) Upstream name is "thermal_daemon" but I see it packaged elsewhere
as "thermald" and the binary / .service is thermald. Preference goes
to...?

The packager... ? i think i'd be more inclined to follow other packagers in a situation liek this where it seemed reasonable, otherwise i'd default to pure upstream.