RE: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
hi, > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Francis GALIEGUE > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 12:40 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file. > > > geoffrey lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > or you cn have two versions of generic spec. one with the autofile > > generation, and one without, and tell first time users to download the > > one without autofile generation..and download the one with auto file > > generation if they know what they are doing.. > > Yup, but the risk for stale files remains. And what do you do with > special cases, ie %dir, %config(anything), and so on? An automatic > file generation cannot and will never generate a correct list for such > a case. YES. that's why i suggested adding the code there for those who know what they are doing, commenting it out, adding a warning there,and use it only when _ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY_. the auto generation of files is extremely useful, and while extreme care should be taken, it should be used whenever possible. and for those who dont' nkow what they are doing, well, they can always use the manual method i.e. %files /usr/bin/foo /usr/lib/bar /usr/man/man6/baz.6.bz2 something like that... > > -- > fg > > # rm *;o > o: command not found >
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
unsubscribe Francis GALIEGUE wrote: > Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > > > > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > and find | less. > Do your %files section from there. > > Clean, never any pb. > > -- > fg > > # rm *;o > o: command not found
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
geoffrey lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > or you cn have two versions of generic spec. one with the autofile > generation, and one without, and tell first time users to download the > one without autofile generation..and download the one with auto file > generation if they know what they are doing.. Yup, but the risk for stale files remains. And what do you do with special cases, ie %dir, %config(anything), and so on? An automatic file generation cannot and will never generate a correct list for such a case. -- fg # rm *;o o: command not found
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
geoffrey lee wrote: > > hi, > > Camille Begnis wrote: > > > > geoffrey lee wrote: > > > > > > hi, > > > > > > Pixel wrote: > > > > > > > > Francis GALIEGUE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > > > > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > > > > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > > > > and find | less. > > > > > Do your %files section from there. > > > > > > > > > > Clean, never any pb. > > > > > > > > i don't agree never to use a file for %files. It's very helpfull when you split > > > > packages. If you don't use an automated file list, you will miss new files in > > > > newer version. > > > > > > i have to agree with pixel here. how about we add this to the generic > > > spec file, and then we comment the auto file generation out and add an > > > appropriate comment to describe how to use it? > > > > Do not forget that the generic spec file is intended for beginners. If > > we suggest them to use auto file generation, they'll use it all the > > time. When they become more experienced spec coders, they find soon or > > later a spec file coding this, and then they be experienced enough to > > use it without dangers. > > > > Camille. > > well, i can see what you mean. i understand that there are dangers with > auto file generation... but still, auto file generation is an extremely > good and useful feature. that's why i suggested putting the code there, > commenting it out, and adding appropriate warning there. e.g. #PLEASE DO > NOT USE THE FOLLOWING CODE UNLESS YOU ABSOLUTELY KNOW WHAT YOU ARE > DOING!! something like that. i.e. we don't suggest that beginners > use it. the auot file feature is for lazy bones like me who want to use > auto file generation but do not want to write a spec file from scratch > ... :-P OK. This is what I propose: I'll put the code apart with explicit warning, adding that it must be used only in extreme cases, for package with too much files to be listed as a whole in spec file. I'll also stress the fact that wildcard are allowed. If someone have something against this, tell it now or wait next release as I MUST publish today new version of external rpm-mdk... Camille.
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
Kaixo! On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 07:00:40PM +0100, Francis GALIEGUE wrote: > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > and find | less. > Do your %files section from there. Myself I often build an rpm package commenting out the %clean section; then I check on the buildroot directory if there isn't some file/directory missed; if all is OK, I remove the comment and rebuild it (with -ba this time) Don't hesitate to use heavily wildcards when possible, too. It is both easier to manage when new files are added or some deleted from the package, but also it is much easier to read and understand something like: %files %doc README COPYING /usr/bin/* /usr/man/man[1-9]/* /usr/share/locale/*/LC_MESSAGES/* /usr/share/foobar than a %files section spanning trough a hundred lines or more. And that is another evilness of the automated inclusion of files: the new rpm builder person doesn't have any idea of what is going on. Someone completly new to rpm packaging can get a clue out of the above example, and adapt it to his needs when building a given package; but the automated ones are much more opaque, and the risk to either forgot some files or either include gibberish are much more high. -- Ki ça vos våye bén, Pablo Saratxaga http://www.ping.be/~pin19314/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0x8F0E4975
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
hi, Camille Begnis wrote: > > geoffrey lee wrote: > > > > hi, > > > > Pixel wrote: > > > > > > Francis GALIEGUE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > > > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > > > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > > > and find | less. > > > > Do your %files section from there. > > > > > > > > Clean, never any pb. > > > > > > i don't agree never to use a file for %files. It's very helpfull when you split > > > packages. If you don't use an automated file list, you will miss new files in > > > newer version. > > > > i have to agree with pixel here. how about we add this to the generic > > spec file, and then we comment the auto file generation out and add an > > appropriate comment to describe how to use it? > > Do not forget that the generic spec file is intended for beginners. If > we suggest them to use auto file generation, they'll use it all the > time. When they become more experienced spec coders, they find soon or > later a spec file coding this, and then they be experienced enough to > use it without dangers. > > Camille. well, i can see what you mean. i understand that there are dangers with auto file generation... but still, auto file generation is an extremely good and useful feature. that's why i suggested putting the code there, commenting it out, and adding appropriate warning there. e.g. #PLEASE DO NOT USE THE FOLLOWING CODE UNLESS YOU ABSOLUTELY KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING!! something like that. i.e. we don't suggest that beginners use it. the auot file feature is for lazy bones like me who want to use auto file generation but do not want to write a spec file from scratch ... :-P or you cn have two versions of generic spec. one with the autofile generation, and one without, and tell first time users to download the one without autofile generation..and download the one with auto file generation if they know what they are doing.. -- #!/bin/sh cat <
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
geoffrey lee wrote: > > hi, > > Pixel wrote: > > > > Francis GALIEGUE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > > and find | less. > > > Do your %files section from there. > > > > > > Clean, never any pb. > > > > i don't agree never to use a file for %files. It's very helpfull when you split > > packages. If you don't use an automated file list, you will miss new files in > > newer version. > > i have to agree with pixel here. how about we add this to the generic > spec file, and then we comment the auto file generation out and add an > appropriate comment to describe how to use it? Do not forget that the generic spec file is intended for beginners. If we suggest them to use auto file generation, they'll use it all the time. When they become more experienced spec coders, they find soon or later a spec file coding this, and then they be experienced enough to use it without dangers. Camille.
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
hi, Pixel wrote: > > Francis GALIEGUE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > > > > > > > > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > and find | less. > > Do your %files section from there. > > > > Clean, never any pb. > > i don't agree never to use a file for %files. It's very helpfull when you split > packages. If you don't use an automated file list, you will miss new files in > newer version. i have to agree with pixel here. how about we add this to the generic spec file, and then we comment the auto file generation out and add an appropriate comment to describe how to use it? -- Regards, snail talk (geoff), master linux system administrator ;-)
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
Francis GALIEGUE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > > > > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > and find | less. > Do your %files section from there. > > Clean, never any pb. i don't agree never to use a file for %files. It's very helpfull when you split packages. If you don't use an automated file list, you will miss new files in newer version.
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons > of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of > "/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work. > > The best is: first, no %files section - then, in a shell, cd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and find | less. Do your %files section from there. Clean, never any pb. -- fg # rm *;o o: command not found
Re: [Cooker] New generic.spec file.
Kaixo!
On Mon, Mar 06, 2000 at 09:57:30AM -0400, Camille Begnis wrote:
> > > find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/info -type f -exec bzip2 -9f {} \;
> > > mkdir -p -m 755 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/info/list
> > > find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/info -type f | sed -e 's,^\'"$RPM_BUILD_ROOT,," \
> > >> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{prefix}/info/list/%{name}.list
> > > fi
> >
> > yeah, seems nice (the list part)
>
> Do not agree, it's always the same problem for auto-generated file
> lists: what happens for shared dirs if $RPM_BUILD_ROOT is set to / ?
> Moreover, it forces the spec writer to search for files and therefore
> detect possible errors or probs.
I agree. a %files section automatically fileld is evil; it generates tons
of error messages on rpm package updates (of the kind of
"/usr/bin directory not empty"), which give a bad image of our work.
> Camille.
--
Ki ça vos våye bén,
Pablo Saratxaga
http://www.ping.be/~pin19314/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0x8F0E4975
