[PATCHES] Contrib RPM specfile improvements

[Stephen Gallagher]

Jan Cholasta noticed that our upstream builder wasn't producing
experimental packages into the ipa-devel repository. This was due to the
builders not setting the enable_experimental variable. Patch 0003 in
this set now makes that the default in the spec file. I left it
conditionalized so that it's easy for other packagers to take the spec
and turn the experimental features back off.

Patch 0001 makes a change that we made in Fedora some time ago to
properly handle filtering Provides: for our python library. The other
approach was long outdated and broke multilib on Fedora 17.

Patch 0002 is a cleanup patch to make the set of files we're installing
explicit, so we can easily catch mistakes. Previously we were installing
files by glob, which meant we could have missed some if we didn't notice
that they hadn't built.

Patch 0003 makes building the experimental features the default for
'make rpms'.

[Jan Cholasta]

On 6.3.2012 16:40, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  Jan Cholasta noticed that our upstream builder wasn't producing
>  experimental packages into the ipa-devel repository. This was due to the
>  builders not setting the enable_experimental variable. Patch 0003 in
>  this set now makes that the default in the spec file. I left it
>  conditionalized so that it's easy for other packagers to take the spec
>  and turn the experimental features back off.
>
>  Patch 0001 makes a change that we made in Fedora some time ago to
>  properly handle filtering Provides: for our python library. The other
>  approach was long outdated and broke multilib on Fedora 17. 
Missing a caret and a backslash:

%define __provides_exclude_from ^%{python_sitearch}.*\.so$

Besides that, ACK.

>  Patch 0002 is a cleanup patch to make the set of files we're installing
>  explicit, so we can easily catch mistakes. Previously we were installing
>  files by glob, which meant we could have missed some if we didn't notice
>  that they hadn't built. 
ACK.

>  Patch 0003 makes building the experimental features the default for
>  'make rpms'.
>  
Please update the makefile too, "make rpms" and "make
experimental-rpms" 
now do exactly the same thing.

Honza

-- 
Jan Cholasta

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 09:33 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>  On 6.3.2012 16:40, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  > Jan Cholasta noticed that our upstream builder wasn't producing
>  > experimental packages into the ipa-devel repository. This was due to the
>  > builders not setting the enable_experimental variable. Patch 0003 in
>  > this set now makes that the default in the spec file. I left it
>  > conditionalized so that it's easy for other packagers to take the spec
>  > and turn the experimental features back off.
>  >
>  > Patch 0001 makes a change that we made in Fedora some time ago to
>  > properly handle filtering Provides: for our python library. The other
>  > approach was long outdated and broke multilib on Fedora 17.
>  
>  Missing a caret and a backslash:
>  
>  %define __provides_exclude_from ^%{python_sitearch}.*\.so$
>  
>  Besides that, ACK.
>   
The caret is not needed, according to http://goo.gl/XDx76
(Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering)

However, you're right that the backslash should be there. Also, I need
to conditionalize this some more; RHEL5 doesn't have this macro, so we
still need to use the old version there.

New patch attached.

>  >
>  > Patch 0002 is a cleanup patch to make the set of files we're installing
>  > explicit, so we can easily catch mistakes. Previously we were installing
>  > files by glob, which meant we could have missed some if we didn't notice
>  > that they hadn't built.
>  
>  ACK.
>  
>  >
>  > Patch 0003 makes building the experimental features the default for
>  > 'make rpms'.
>  >
>  
>  Please update the makefile too, "make rpms" and "make
> experimental-rpms" 
>  now do exactly the same thing. 
Thanks, fixed in new patch.

[Jan Cholasta]

On 8.3.2012 13:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 09:33 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
> > On 6.3.2012 16:40, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >> Jan Cholasta noticed that our upstream builder wasn't producing
> >> experimental packages into the ipa-devel repository. This was due to the
> >> builders not setting the enable_experimental variable. Patch 0003 in
> >> this set now makes that the default in the spec file. I left it
> >> conditionalized so that it's easy for other packagers to take the spec
> >> and turn the experimental features back off.
> >>
> >> Patch 0001 makes a change that we made in Fedora some time ago to
> >> properly handle filtering Provides: for our python library. The other
> >> approach was long outdated and broke multilib on Fedora 17.
> >
> > Missing a caret and a backslash:
> >
> > %define __provides_exclude_from ^%{python_sitearch}.*\.so$
> >
> > Besides that, ACK.
> >
>
>  The caret is not needed, according to http://goo.gl/XDx76
>  (Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering)
>
>  However, you're right that the backslash should be there. Also, I need
>  to conditionalize this some more; RHEL5 doesn't have this macro, so we
>  still need to use the old version there.
>
>  New patch attached. 
Forgot about a slash, it should probably be there as well:

%define __provides_exclude_from %{python_sitearch}/.*\.so$

> >>
> >> Patch 0002 is a cleanup patch to make the set of files we're installing
> >> explicit, so we can easily catch mistakes. Previously we were installing
> >> files by glob, which meant we could have missed some if we didn't notice
> >> that they hadn't built.
> >
> > ACK.
> >
> >>
> >> Patch 0003 makes building the experimental features the default for
> >> 'make rpms'.
> >>
> >
> > Please update the makefile too, "make rpms" and "make
> experimental-rpms"
> > now do exactly the same thing.
>
>  Thanks, fixed in new patch.
>  
Is it OK to just remove experimental-rpms? Now there is no way to create 
non-experimental rpms using make.

If it is OK, please also remove prerelease-experimental-rpms.

Honza

-- 
Jan Cholasta

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 15:51 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>  On 8.3.2012 13:20, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  > On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 09:33 +0100, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>  >> On 6.3.2012 16:40, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  >>> Jan Cholasta noticed that our upstream builder wasn't producing
>  >>> experimental packages into the ipa-devel repository. This was due to the
>  >>> builders not setting the enable_experimental variable. Patch 0003 in
>  >>> this set now makes that the default in the spec file. I left it
>  >>> conditionalized so that it's easy for other packagers to take the spec
>  >>> and turn the experimental features back off.
>  >>>
>  >>> Patch 0001 makes a change that we made in Fedora some time ago to
>  >>> properly handle filtering Provides: for our python library. The other
>  >>> approach was long outdated and broke multilib on Fedora 17.
>  >>
>  >> Missing a caret and a backslash:
>  >>
>  >> %define __provides_exclude_from ^%{python_sitearch}.*\.so$
>  >>
>  >> Besides that, ACK.
>  >> 
Fixed

>  >
>  > The caret is not needed, according to http://goo.gl/XDx76
>  > (Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering)
>  >
>  > However, you're right that the backslash should be there. Also, I need
>  > to conditionalize this some more; RHEL5 doesn't have this macro, so we
>  > still need to use the old version there.
>  >
>  > New patch attached.
>  
>  Forgot about a slash, it should probably be there as well:
>  
>  %define __provides_exclude_from %{python_sitearch}/.*\.so$
>  
>  >
>  >>>
>  >>> Patch 0002 is a cleanup patch to make the set of files we're installing
>  >>> explicit, so we can easily catch mistakes. Previously we were installing
>  >>> files by glob, which meant we could have missed some if we didn't
> notice
>  >>> that they hadn't built.
>  >>
>  >> ACK.
>  >>
>  >>>
>  >>> Patch 0003 makes building the experimental features the default for
>  >>> 'make rpms'.
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >> Please update the makefile too, "make rpms" and "make
> experimental-rpms"
>  >> now do exactly the same thing.
>  >
>  > Thanks, fixed in new patch.
>  >
>  
>  Is it OK to just remove experimental-rpms? Now there is no way to create 
>  non-experimental rpms using make.
>  
>  If it is OK, please also remove prerelease-experimental-rpms. 
It's fine. This is a contributed file intended only for development
purposes (where you're likely going to want to build the experimental
stuff). If you don't want to do so, you can modify the specfile to your
needs.

I've pushed all three of the attached patches to master and sssd-1-8.