-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 04:28 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
>> 2. let's make a mock 0.5 release so we don't have any confusion over
>> outstanding problems and test out that release before we deploy to the
>> buildsys.
>
> Whenever the t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
seth vidal wrote:
>
> 1. Clark: could you modify your buildsys rpm so that it produces a
> single package named buildsys-build and could you check that spec file
> into mock cvs, since it will be handy there?
Done. I checked in buildsys-build.spec, a M
On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 04:28 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> 2. let's make a mock 0.5 release so we don't have any confusion over
> outstanding problems and test out that release before we deploy to the
> buildsys.
Whenever the trigger gets pulled, push the new mock packages through the
buildsys and I'l
On Apr 11, 2006, at 11:09 AM, Clark Williams wrote:
seth vidal wrote:
3. what other patches need to go into mock before we release 0.5?
- the one's I know about but wouldn't mind a reference to are:
a. /dev/std* patch
1. the patch submitted to fix this is definitely in mock cvs
On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 10:09 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> seth vidal wrote:
> >> 1. okay - as panu was so kind to point out - we don't need 3 packages,
> >> really. - just one
> >> 2. I made the changes in mock cvs to have it install via a packa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
seth vidal wrote:
>> 1. okay - as panu was so kind to point out - we don't need 3 packages,
>> really. - just one
>> 2. I made the changes in mock cvs to have it install via a package of
>> the above style - the config option is chroot_dep_package
>> 3
> 1. okay - as panu was so kind to point out - we don't need 3 packages,
> really. - just one
> 2. I made the changes in mock cvs to have it install via a package of
> the above style - the config option is chroot_dep_package
> 3. what other patches need to go into mock before we release 0.5?
>
On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 13:22 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> Attached is a new specfile that creates three binary RPMs:
> buildsys-base, buildsys-minimal, and buildsys-build. This one doesn't
> include the specfile as payload and is somewhat cleaned up.
>
1. okay - as panu was so kind to point out
On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 00:23 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 13:22 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
>
> > >2) What's the purpose of installing the spec file in the chroot? I'm
> > >afraid I don't see the point. You'll never need it there. If you want
> > >to see what the requires
On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 13:22 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> >2) What's the purpose of installing the spec file in the chroot? I'm
> >afraid I don't see the point. You'll never need it there. If you want
> >to see what the requires were that got installed, you could do a "rpm -
> >qRp buildsys-minim
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Smith wrote:
>>Summary: Dependency package for minimal buildroot
>>Name: buildsys-minimal
>>Version: fc5
>>Release: 1
>>License: GPL
>>Group: Development/Build Tools
>>Source0: buildsys-minimal.spec
>>BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 14:26 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> All,
>
> I hand-hacked this specfile together using the FC4 buildroots.xml as
> the starting point.
... stuff deleted ...
> Summary: Dependency package for minimal buildroot
> Name: buildsys-minimal
> Version: fc5
> Release: 1
> License:
On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 10:34 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> seth vidal wrote:
>
> >There need to be 3 pkgs, probably:
> >
> >buildsys-minimal
> >buildsys-base
> >buildsys-build
> >
> >to match up to the 3 groups in that buildroots.xml file.
> >
> >the contents of those groups can be re-discussed, i
seth vidal wrote:
There need to be 3 pkgs, probably:
buildsys-minimal
buildsys-base
buildsys-build
to match up to the 3 groups in that buildroots.xml file.
the contents of those groups can be re-discussed, if need be, but they
were discussed once before, too, iirc.
-sv
So, buildsys-base
On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 09:08 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Enrico Scholz wrote:
>
> >
> >For what are these Requires:? AFAIS, they are not part of the minimal
> >buildroot defined at
> >
> >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Enrico Scholz wrote:
>
>For what are these Requires:? AFAIS, they are not part of the minimal
>buildroot defined at
>
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-4cadce5e79d38a63cad3941de1dadc9d25d67d30
>
>and will hide packaging errors.
Am Mittwoch, den 05.04.2006, 08:03 +0200 schrieb Enrico Scholz:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clark Williams) writes:
>
> > Requires: openssh-server
> > Requires: udev
> > Requires: intltool
> > Requires: autoconf
> > Requires: gettext
> > Requires: automake
> > Requires: gdb
> > Requires: flex
> > Require
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clark Williams) writes:
> Requires: openssh-server
> Requires: udev
> Requires: intltool
> Requires: autoconf
> Requires: gettext
> Requires: automake
> Requires: gdb
> Requires: flex
> Requires: libtool
> Requires: strace
> Requires: bison
> Requires: byacc
> Requires: diffstat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Weyl wrote:
>On 4/4/06, Clark Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>It generates a small binary RPM (and an SRPM) that contains one file,
>>buildsys-minimal.spec and requires all the listed packages. I
>>originally had BuildRequires and then c
On 4/4/06, Clark Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It generates a small binary RPM (and an SRPM) that contains one file,
> buildsys-minimal.spec and requires all the listed packages. I
> originally had BuildRequires and then changed to Requires, just
> because it's easy to query the resulting b
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 16:15 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> seth vidal wrote:
>
> >>Anyway, that's what I thought Seth was talking about with his RPM
> >>idea. What do you think?
> >>
> >>#Requires: buildsys-macros
> >
> >why comment this one out
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
seth vidal wrote:
>>Anyway, that's what I thought Seth was talking about with his RPM
>>idea. What do you think?
>>
>>#Requires: buildsys-macros
>
>why comment this one out?
>
Ah, busted... :)
I didn't have it or know where it came from, so I comment
On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 14:26 -0500, Clark Williams wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> All,
>
> I hand-hacked this specfile together using the FC4 buildroots.xml as
> the starting point. Just wanted to put together a test to see how
> complicated it would be (it wasn't; wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
I hand-hacked this specfile together using the FC4 buildroots.xml as
the starting point. Just wanted to put together a test to see how
complicated it would be (it wasn't; witness the fact that I did it :).
I've got a start on a small python scrip
24 matches
Mail list logo
