Add spec for using cargo-rpm

[cfcosta]

With this, fedora/rhel/centos users can use their default package
manager to install bat, without needing cargo or rust.

[sharkdp]

Great! Thank you very much!

Can we move bat.spec to a different folder (maybe assets/packaging or ci) or is .rpm required?

Also, it would be fantastic if we could add installation instructions for the mentioned distributions to the README file. I'm not familar with cargo-rpm and RPM- based package managers.

[edouardmenayde]

👍

[steven-p-walsh]

I was able to compile from source to get this to work on Fedora, but it would have been much simpler if a .rpm existed

[moosingin3space]

FYI, the Fedora community is standardizing around rust2rpm as our solution to generating RPMs from crates.

[sharkdp]

@moosingin3space What does this mean for this PR?

[moosingin3space]

@sharkdp it means that if you wish bat to be packaged in Fedora proper, rust2rpm or similar will need to be used to be compatible with Fedora packaging guidelines for Rust.

As a Fedora user and a Rust enthusiast, I think we should figure out a good solution for automatically packaging crates, possibly using COPR, but that's beyond your scope.

[sharkdp]

@moosingin3space Thank you very much for your feedback. I'm going to close this for now and leave it up package maintainers to create RPMs/coprs/.. etc.

Hope this is fine for everyone.

[sharkdp]

There is actually a copr by @cfcosta, but it's outdated:

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/cfcosta/bat/

[moosingin3space]

I just had a look at that copr, and it seems to just distribute binaries in the SRPM, which is a big no-no in Fedora packaging policy.

For the time being, I'm using it from cargo and would recommend most users do that. When I get time, I might look into building a copr that's compatible with Fedora policy so bat can be officially packaged. It's an awesome tool!

[sharkdp]

@moosingin3space Sounds great - Let us know!