Spec URL: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/poky-scripts.spec SRPM URL: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/poky-scripts-6-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Poky-scripts contains utility scripts for Poky such as poky-qemu, which will run a Poky image in QEMU with the right arguments. Successful Koji builds for F-11, F-12 and EL-5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1864970 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1864986 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1864982
Created sub-package poky-depends in poky-scripts package itself. Spec URL: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/poky-scripts.spec SRPM URL: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/poky-scripts-6-2.fc12.src.rpm Successful Koji builds for F-11, F-12 and EL-5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1865273 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1865277 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1865279
#001: BuildRequires : - glibc-devel requires glibc-headers already. You can remove glibc-headers from BR ( rpm -qR glibc-devel ) - poky-depends is a meta package. In other words, it doesn't build anything, hence it should not require an BR. That said, the spec file does not build anything except copying files to the buildroot. So I think you should remove all the BRs #002: Requires: In your spec file : poky-scripts requires poky-depends. poky-depends requires poky-scripts. It seems to be a circular-dependency. Shouldn't all the requires (since poky-depends is a metapackage) of poky-depends be put as requires for poky-scripts and remove poky-depends entirely ? #003: check the explicit requires with rpm -qR package
#001: Will remove glibc-headers. A person can choose to use the poky-scripts OR the poky-depends package. The poky-depends package is required if the developer wants to download and build Poky. The poky-scripts package is used if the developer only wants to test some downloaded pre-built images. So, we need to have BRs in the sub-package. Is that ok? #002: Yes, the circular dependency is wrong. I will remove it. #003 Explicit requires for what?
#001: Yes #003: python-sqlite2 requires python
#003: $ rpm -qR python-sqlite2 ... python(abi) = 2.6 It does pull python. So, we can remove the explicit dependency of including python in Requires?
#001: Removed glibc-headers. Continue to use BR for poky-depends. #002: Removed circular dependency. SPEC: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/poky-scripts.spec SRPM: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/poky-scripts-6-4.fc12.src.rpm Successful Koji builds for F-11, F-12 and EL-5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1873827 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1873838 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1873840
#001: Why do need BR for the meta package ? #004: The following is not required # poky-depends %{__cp} -p %{SOURCE1} %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}etch1 #005: %files : directory and file ownership %dir %{_datadir}/%{name} <<< 1 %{_bindir}/poky-* %{_datadir}/%{name} <<< 2 1 >>> directory ownership 2 >>> directory ownership and all the files and folders it contains. When you are using %{_datadir}/%{name} you don't have to use %dir %{_datadir}/%{name #006: the meta package should be a noarch package.
#001: If I put glibc-devel in Requires, rpmlint complaints: poky-depends.noarch: E: devel-dependency glibc-devel I have moved glibc-devel to Requires. Will ignore rpmlint warning. #004: I have added Source1: README.fedora. Retained the following: # poky-depends %{__cp} -p %{SOURCE1} %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}etch1 %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE1} %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} #005: Fixed. #006: Added the following BuildArchitectures: noarch in -depends meta package. SPEC: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/poky-scripts.spec SRPM: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/poky-scripts-6-5.fc12.src.rpm Successful Koji builds for F-11, F-12 and EL-5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1875300 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1875306 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1875316
Are you planning to ship this for EL-5 as well ? If yes, the RPM version of EL-5 does not support noarch subpackages. Hence you should add the following for the -depends %if 0%{?fedora} BuildArchitectures: noarch %endif
Reply for #9 Yes, for EL-5. Updated the if statement for -depends and made a new .spec file. SPEC: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/poky-scripts.spec SRPM: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/poky-scripts-6-6.fc12.src.rpm Successful Koji builds for F-11, F-12 and EL-5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1881522 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1881524 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1881526
- MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. - MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible. - MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least i686. - MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires. - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly. poky does not have any. - MUST: If the package does not contain shared library files located in the dynamic linker's default paths. poky does not have any. - MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable - MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates. - MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: There are no Large documentation files. poky does not have any. - MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. - MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries - MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix - MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives - MUST: Package containing GUI applications includes a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. SHOULD Items: - SHOULD: mock builds successfully in i686. - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. - SHOULD: No scriptlets were used, those scriptlets must be sane. APPROVED
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: poky-scripts Short Description: Poky platform builder utility scripts Owners: shakthimaan chitlesh Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-5
cvs done.
poky-scripts-6-6.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/poky-scripts-6-6.fc11
poky-scripts-6-6.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/poky-scripts-6-6.fc12
poky-scripts-6-6.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/poky-scripts-6-6.el5
poky-scripts-6-6.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update poky-scripts'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-1043
poky-scripts-6-6.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
poky-scripts-6-6.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
poky-scripts-6-6.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.