Bug 235232
| Summary: | spec files should contain instructions for creating custom tarball | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Bernard Johnson <bjohnson> |
| Component: | wine | Assignee: | Andreas Bierfert <andreas.bierfert> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | low | ||
| Version: | 6 | Keywords: | EasyFix |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2007-04-19 06:48:38 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Bernard Johnson
2007-04-04 17:05:36 UTC
Why do you need it? It just brings it up to current packaging standards. Please see "When Upstream uses Prohibited Code" here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL I know about them but I am not really happy with putting in a lengthy desription on how to get the source clean as it is not just removing some stuff from the code and adding a diff for this would be the same as leaving the code inside the sourcefile. Everybody who wants to know can make a diff against the original tarball. What I can do is add a note why these are custom sources and what diff options can be used to see what is happening (with a link to the original sources). (In reply to comment #3) > I know about them but I am not really happy with putting in a lengthy desription > on how to get the source clean as it is not just removing some stuff from the > code and adding a diff for this would be the same as leaving the code inside the > sourcefile. Everybody who wants to know can make a diff against the original > tarball. Can you reduce your modifications to a script that you include as a SourceX line and say "run this on the original sources to produce a -fe tarball if you need to create it from scratch"?? I don't think anyone cares to have a lengthy explanation in the spec, just the ability to easily reproduce the source tarball. Consider the case of if something tragic happened to you and someone else had to take over the package and upgrade from N to N+1. Where would they start? Personally, I was having problems with wine myself and someone posted a patch to the wine bugzilla for my problem. I was going to rebuild the SRPM, but the patch wouldn't cleanly apply against 0.32 so I was going to drop in a 0.33 source. Without instruction on how to easily create a -fe tarball, I had to resort to hacking the spec file to include the additional files produced by the original source. Not really an optimal situation. > What I can do is add a note why these are custom sources and what diff options > can be used to see what is happening (with a link to the original sources). Better than nothing, but still doesn't cover the N -> N+1 case very well. Depending on the amount of work that you are talking about, it may be the best option though, at least at this point. I'm sure your judgment on the best approach will be good. On another topic, a bump from 0.32 to 0.34 would be nice. And if you do, please include this patch: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2007-April/037784.html I will see what I can do but the script would need to contain diffs and applying it to the next release would probably not work anyway. Will think about it till tomorro so. I will bump to .34 asap. I have it build here locally for some time but there are some fedora bugs which I'd like to fix before bumping I will have the time in the next days so stay tuned... (will also look at the patch). |