[Bug 578480] Review Request: spectrum - XMPP transport/gateway

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578480

--- Comment #20 from Michal Schmidt <mschmidt at redhat.com> 2010-06-07 13:06:28 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> (In reply to comment #18)
> > I see you're firmly set on having the spec file compatible with RHEL-5
> 
> Yes, because spectrum is a server application and I still hold that sane people
> use RHEL/CentOS for servers (me included, and of course, I do that package for
> myself in the first place ;)).

My point was that sprinkling the spec file with weird conditionals is not the
only way to have the package working in RHEL-5. Sometimes it makes sense to
have different but clean spec files in the branches. Both approaches are
acceptable in general.

> > If you
> > want to be compatible, just stick with the old "_initrddir" - it's still used
> > in many Fedora spec files
> 
> yes, but it is deprecated and it will be gone soon

Will it? Even in today's devel/ in Fedora CVS the old form is still 6 times
more common than the new one (931 vs. 147 occurrences). I am not aware of a
plan to remove the old one from the RPM macros any time soon.

> It's now
> 
>     %if 0%{?rhel} <= 5 && 0%{?fedora} < 7
> 
> everywhere

This would be more idiomatic (it's found in a few Fedora spec files):
   %if 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 5
Its slight advantage is that it does not convey a false hint that it could do
something useful on FC6.

Do you intend to support EL-4 too? If not, then it's pretty much equivalent to:
   %if 0%{?el5}

> The problem is with RHEL-5/PPC missing many packages available elsewhere (there
> is no RHEL-5/PPC-Desktop and for example libpurple is a desktop package in RHEL
> understanding of the world); besides, group of people longing to run spectrum
> on some IBM PowerPC is so small, that I don't want to bother.

Fair enough. But I wonder if this part of the Guidelines applies then:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Architecture_Build_Failures


Now a few comments about your latest spec:
> Version: 0.3
> Release: 0.git20100526.1%{?dist}

I see this is a pre-release snapshot. Let's compare the Release to the example
in the Guidelines: "kismet-0-0.1.20040110svn"
This suggests that you should rather use:
  Release: 0.1.git20100526%{?dist}
or even:
  Release: 0.1.20100526git%{?dist}

> [...]
> Source0: %{name}.tar.bz2

A comment is needed to describe how to recreate the tarball from git.

> %build
> cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=%{_prefix}  -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=debug .
> make

I know next to nothing about using cmake, but there are some cmake guidelines
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/cmake) and they recommend something
else:
  %build
  %cmake .
  make VERBOSE=1 %{?_smp_mflags}
Please either use the recommended form, or add a comment explaining why you use
something else.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.