-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 345
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add spec file needed to build rpms #111
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
URL: https://github.com/Yelp/dumb-init | ||
Source0: https://github.com/Yelp/dumb-init/archive/v1.1.3.tar.gz | ||
|
||
BuildRequires: vim-common |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why does this build-depend on vim-common?
Thanks for sending this in! We don't know very much about RPM packaging, so if anyone viewing this has comments or can review it better than we can, that'd be much appreciated :) Could you also update Would it be useful for us to post built RPMs to GitHub releases as well, like we do for the Debian packages? |
I'm trying to use Copr service to offer secure RPMS builds directly for latest fedora and CentOS. you just need to update a single line which is
|
build is done using
regarding quality of this file, it can be reviewed using rpmlint and I've tested it and validated it
|
no need to update the url, I made it to read the version from second line
Yes they are ready from here https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/alsadi/dumb-init/ If you merge it, I can make the build system points to your github repo and provide build directly from there. I guess fedora/centos people would prefer yum repo rather than downloading the rpm file. so you might need to point them to my copr or create your own copr repo. |
here is the direct rpm link if you like |
URL: https://github.com/Yelp/dumb-init | ||
Source0: https://github.com/Yelp/dumb-init/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz | ||
|
||
BuildRequires: vim-common |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
still curious why this depends on vim-common? (GitHub buried my original comment, it seems)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
still curious why this depends on vim-common? (GitHub buried my original comment, it seems)
because I have a line that runs make VERSION.h
(although it's commented out) which calls /bin/xdd which belongs to vim-common
[root@localhost ~]# rpm -qf /bin/xxd
vim-common-7.4.1868-1.fc24.x86_64
You can make it depend on /bin/xxd as filename if you wish
You can comment both out (so that the one who is building un-released version would enable both again)
I guess we have got around 5 fedora developers reviewing this, and things are going well. Do you have headless-test (that can run when build machine is offline and can't reach network or a without running docker daemon) to be conducted during the build process to validate the build. My guess is there is no such tests, because your tests in the |
I believe On Aug 18, 2016 10:19 AM, "Muayyad Alsadi" notifications@github.com wrote:
|
For others' reference, here's the Fedora ticket: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1367033 Let us know when you think this is ready-to-go. It seems okay to me, but I don't know enough about RPM packaging to do a thorough review. We're happy to take your / the Fedora developers' word for it :) |
Also, to expand on @asottile's comment, If that's not acceptable because there's no internet at all, you can do what Debian does to run tests during the build: override_dh_auto_test:
PATH=.:$$PATH py.test tests/ You'd need to install the test dependencies beforehand, though. The test dependencies the Debian maintainer is installing are: ,python
,python-mock
,python-pytest I assume there are equivalent packages in RPM land? |
I have another branch for activating testing build. please merge this one as is. here is the other branch https://github.com/muayyad-alsadi/dumb-init/tree/rpm-spec-with-check I'll open another issue regarding the tests. |
@chriskuehl are you against building RPM and DEB packages from the gradle nebula ospackage plugin? I realize this isn't a Java project but it uses a Java library to build both DEB and RPM packages. The advantage to this is you can be on a DEB system and build RPM packages with the same amount of effort (i.e. almost no effort). |
@samrocketman yes, I'm against using tools other than the best tool ever. in fedora the best tool is the most easy way might be is to use docker to start a fedora/centos container rpmbuild -bs dumb-init.spec this would build a |
@samrocketman I don't think we want to change the Debian packaging too much, since we use a version of this internally too. I'm guessing it might be easier to just set up additional RPM packaging? Pretty much all a system package has to do is provide the binary at We don't know much about RPM packaging, though, so I'm definitely open to recommendations on the best way to approach that. I'm happy to add a simple step to our release process (e.g. uploading RPMs in addition to the debs) if that would help consumers of dumb-init. We already build the Debian packages in a |
LGTM just checked with my rpm build environment (OracleLinux8), works for me (with changes to latest version of package sources):
Anything else needs to be done for this PR to be merged? Thanks. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ | |||
Name: dumb-init | |||
Version: 1.1.3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
please update to current version
%license LICENSE | ||
%doc README.md | ||
|
||
%changelog |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
please update changelog to current version
fixes #110