Merging freediams into freemedforms

Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur at
Thu Sep 12 08:58:24 UTC 2013

Hi Michael,

I'm sorry for the *very* delayed reply. I hadn't noticed this mail come

On Sun, 2013-08-18 at 20:41 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 23:05:48 +1000, Ankur Sinha wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I maintain two packages for the fedora-medical SIG that fall under the
> > "freemedforms[1]" project. At the moment, these are packaged separately:
> > 
> > 1. freemedforms[2]: provides freemedforms-emr and pulls in freediams
> > 2. freediams[3]
> > 
> > Now, freemedforms-emr and freediams are both built from the same source,
> Since Fedora package git has been changed already, I've had a look at the
> f18 branch:
>   $ cat freediams/sources 
>   e014e81b349ef5d41bdb956653fb18ab  freemedformsfullsources-0.7.5.tgz
>   $ cat freemedforms/sources 
>   e014e81b349ef5d41bdb956653fb18ab  freemedformsfullsources-0.7.5.tgz
> ???
> _Why_ has it been done like that?

Two reasons:

- In the past, the build system wasn't as good as it is now.
- Since they are two *completely* different applications, we thought
it'd be better + easier to review them separately when we initially
packaged them up.

> > and use the same internal libraries. Currently, I first build
> > freemedforms-emr and the common libraries (spec[4]) and then build
> > freediams (spec[5]), pointing to these libraries. 
> Is it strictly required to build stuff from freemedforms src.rpm _before_
> freediams could be built from the same tarball? Would it have been
> possible to build both from within a single src.rpm?

Yes. It's a must since freediams requires the *same* internal libraries
that are built during the freemedforms build. Ideally, if they were
built differently, both would generate the libraries during their
respective build processes. Instead of doing this, and duplicating the
libraries, I build the libraries only once with freemedforms and then
point the freediams build to them.

If I build them from the same src.rpm, I'll do:

cmake.......# build freemedforms with libraries

cmake.......# point to already built libraries and build freediams

(This is what upstream's spec also does. It doesn't use one cmake
command to build everything)

> > Recently, with the 0.9.0-beta1 release, upstream sent me a new spec and
> > suggested I use one spec to build both freedmedforms and freediams, and
> > provide freediams as a subpackage.
> > 
> > I've built freemedforms already, and I'm in the process of updating
> > freediams now. 
> > 
> > I think it's a good idea, since they'll always move hand in hand. The
> > build process will be simpler, and so will maintaining the package and
> > updates.
> > 
> > What do you folks think? Should I go ahead and retire(obsolete)
> > freediams and provide it as a subpackage in freemedforms? I don't see
> > any issues with this, but wanted to consult you folks to be sure before
> > I go ahead and make the changes. 
> Of course! If that hasn't been possible before and now _is_ possible with
> 0.9.0-beta1, it's the better choice than duplicating the source tarball.

Great. I wanted to be sure of this before I went around obsoleting
packages etc.

I'll combine them whenever I find the cycles.
Warm regards,
Ankur (FranciscoD)

Join Fedora! Come talk to us!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the devel mailing list