-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix rpm build script #437
Fix rpm build script #437
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you drop the spec
file changes?
We keep this spec
in sync with fedora downstream createrepo_c spec
files and this would break our workflow. We are using the Github releases and those are tar.gz
.
I would rather you update to make_tarball.sh
.
Sorry for long waiting, I've lost notification. Problem there not only with format of archive. That part is easy to fix without touching spec. Source tar named as a So, there is two ways: |
I've pushed fix of first part now (xz -> gz). But about second part (version) I need a decision. Because both of ways looks like "definitely not ideal". |
I would find the condition is spec file less confusing so I prefer the second approach. |
Someone had tried something like that before, because variable gitrev tried to insert in spec by sed. But nothing used it. Also, I have found second problem that actually version is defined in two places for different purposes (spec + VERSION.cmake). It makes build a little bit more complicated, but solution was founded by using non-version-specific path for eggs in %file section of spec. It's again non ideal, but will work in every case. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am sorry I didn't realize there will be a conflict and I bumped the version.
Can you please rebase?
Otherwise it looks good.
Yeah, no problem. Rebased |
Thank you |
Reported as #436
Some small fixes of generating rpm packages