Bug 1949590

Summary: [RFE:EPEL] Request to add s-nail to EPEL 7 and 8
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Ulrik Haugen <ulrik.haugen>
Component: s-nailAssignee: Nikola Forró <nforro>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: magnus, nforro
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: s-nail-14.9.22-3.el8 s-nail-14.9.22-3.el7 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-04-30 01:22:15 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/gpgverify from Fedora 33 (needs executable bits) none

Description Ulrik Haugen 2021-04-14 15:50:18 UTC 
Created attachment 1771938 [details]
/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/gpgverify from Fedora 33 (needs executable bits)

Would you consider producing EPEL 7 and 8 builds of s-nail?

Either way, thanks for the time you invested in packaging this software for Fedora! Much appreciated!

Or in language suggested by the Fedora project wiki:

------------------------------ 8< ------------------------------

Hello Nikola!

I am using Centos 7 and 8 and am using various packages in the EPEL[1] 
repository. I am interested in seeing s-nail added to EPEL.

Would it be possible for you to maintain the package in EPEL? If not 
do you know of a maintainer who could help you with it? While EPEL 
is more conservative in package maintenance, it does allow for updates
to later versions when needed[2].

If you are not interested in EPEL or don't feel like you have the time
to put your packages into EPEL, the EPEL project would like to request
that a co-maintainer who is a part of EPEL be added to your packages[3].

The EPEL team appreciates your help with EPEL.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL

[2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies

[3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/FAQ

------------------------------ 8< ------------------------------


I have tried building s-nail-14.9.22-2.eln110.src.rpm in Centos 7 and 8.

On Centos 8 the only changes needed was to add /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/gpgverify from Fedora 33 (see attachment) as Source3 and replace the %prep scriptlet with:

%{SOURCE3} --keyring='%{SOURCE2}' --signature='%{SOURCE1}' --data='%{SOURCE0}'

On Centos 7, in addition to the changes needed for Centos 8 the build_cflags and build_ldflags macros are not defined, i substituted optflags for the former and __global_ldflags for the latter, also curly braces do not seem to work in %files so i had to substitute four rows each for the alternatives ghosts.
Comment 1 Nikola Forró 2021-04-14 18:12:09 UTC 
Sure, I can do that.

> On Centos 8 the only changes needed was to add /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/gpgverify from Fedora 33 (see attachment) as Source3 and replace the %prep scriptlet with:

> %{SOURCE3} --keyring='%{SOURCE2}' --signature='%{SOURCE1}' --data='%{SOURCE0}'

> On Centos 7, in addition to the changes needed for Centos 8 the build_cflags and build_ldflags macros are not defined, i substituted optflags for the former and __global_ldflags for the latter, also curly braces do not seem to work in %files so i had to substitute four rows each for the alternatives ghosts.

That's not necessary, gpgverify and all the macros are in epel-rpm-macros. I removed the globs from %files in Fedora, so the spec doesn't have to diverge:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/s-nail/c/f6f7eba2769200788b817bf87e2b054390f9f454?branch=rawhide
Comment 2 Fedora Update System 2021-04-14 19:26:49 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4b948efe93 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4b948efe93
Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2021-04-14 19:26:49 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e4d179b6d5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e4d179b6d5
Comment 4 Ulrik Haugen 2021-04-15 06:27:21 UTC 
(In reply to Nikola Forró from comment #1)
> Sure, I can do that.

Thank you very much!

> That's not necessary, gpgverify and all the macros are in epel-rpm-macros.

Interesting, that package is going into my packaging images.


I will test the new packages and vote in Bodhi but i have a meeting all day
so i don't expect to get it done today.
Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2021-04-15 14:17:11 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e4d179b6d5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e4d179b6d5

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 6 Ulrik Haugen 2021-04-15 15:16:50 UTC 
My meeting ended early so i was able to test and vote in Bodhi today.

Thanks again!
Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2021-04-15 15:23:11 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4b948efe93 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4b948efe93

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2021-04-30 01:22:15 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4b948efe93 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2021-05-01 00:42:39 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-e4d179b6d5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.