I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec file # How to create the source tarball: # # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/ # cd client/python-rhsm # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgz Never used tito before, so I install it and try, and rather than giving me the source package I need - it gives me a python traceback complaining that I haven't configured some things properly. Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed as source tarballs? Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksum was identical. Guess those days are gone. /rant
On Tue, December 13, 2016 4:16 pm, Alice Wonder wrote:> I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when > the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec > file > > # How to create the source tarball: > # > # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/ > # cd client/python-rhsm > # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgz > > Never used tito before, so I install it and try, and rather than giving > me the source package I need - it gives me a python traceback > complaining that I haven't configured some things properly. > > Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex > with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS > rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to > get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing > tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. > > Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed > as source tarballs? > > Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would > reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp > on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksum > was identical. > > Guess those days are gone.<rant> Not exactly. I'm pretty happy with FreeBSD pkg system, and with poudriere whenever I need custom configs different from what package maintainers choice. No unneeded complication crap. Of course, this is only rant from point of view of mentioning our rival: FreeBSD on our list ;-) </rant> Valeri> > /rant > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Le 13/12/2016 ? 23:16, Alice Wonder a ?crit :> Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex > with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS > rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to > get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing > tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. > > Whatever happened to KISS<rant> That's why I'm running Slackware on most of my systems. </rant> -- Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables 7, place de l'?glise - 30730 Montpezat Web : http://www.microlinux.fr Mail : info at microlinux.fr T?l. : 04 66 63 10 32
On 12/13/2016 2:35 PM, Nicolas Kovacs wrote:> That's why I'm running Slackware on most of my systems.that doesn't solve the issue of various FOSS projects using all kinda whacky build toolkits and requirements. one tool I wanted to build a few weeks ago depended on common lisp. another package I wanted to play with required this whole complex python infrastructure which I'd never seen or heard of before (Im not a python dev although I can follow bits of code, and even make minor changes), and the build commands in that infrastructure were pulling in source packages from various servers all over the world, which kinda scared me from a security standpoint. -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz
On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 14:16 -0800, Alice Wonder wrote:> I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when > the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec file > > # How to create the source tarball: > # > # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/ > # cd client/python-rhsm > # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgz > > Never used tito before, so I install it and try, and rather than giving > me the source package I need - it gives me a python traceback > complaining that I haven't configured some things properly. > > Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex > with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS > rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to > get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing > tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. > > Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed > as source tarballs? > > Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would > reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp > on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksum > was identical. > > Guess those days are gone. > > /rantHi, Not seen this one before, but don't play with much python. The SPEC really should just refer too a URL too a compressed archive as the packages home site supplies them. https://github.com/candlepin/python-rhsm/releases Regards Phil -- Google+: https://plus.google.com/+PhilWyett Blog: https://philwyett-hemi.blogspot.co.uk/ GitLab: https://gitlab.com/philwyett_hemi/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20161213/253e706c/attachment-0001.sig>
On 12/13/2016 03:34 PM, Phil Wyett wrote:> On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 14:16 -0800, Alice Wonder wrote: >> I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when >> the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec file >> >> # How to create the source tarball: >> # >> # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/ >> # cd client/python-rhsm >> # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgz >> >> Never used tito before, so I install it and try, and rather than giving >> me the source package I need - it gives me a python traceback >> complaining that I haven't configured some things properly. >> >> Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex >> with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS >> rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to >> get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing >> tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. >> >> Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed >> as source tarballs? >> >> Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would >> reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp >> on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksum >> was identical. >> >> Guess those days are gone. >> >> /rant > > Hi, > > Not seen this one before, but don't play with much python. The SPEC > really should just refer too a URL too a compressed archive as the > packages home site supplies them. > > https://github.com/candlepin/python-rhsm/releases > > Regards > > PhilI went to the github and it doesn't have a packaged release that matches the version. I managed to find it in the build system logs, but its just weird. If I recall, formerly for a tarball to be different than what was on upstream, it had to have a legal reason (e.g. patents) and a script in the sources that could turn upstream tarball into the version used.
Hello Alice, On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 14:16 -0800, Alice Wonder wrote:> I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when > the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec file > > # How to create the source tarball: > # > # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/ > # cd client/python-rhsm > # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgzSeems like a valid issue to take upstream. Especially since Red Hat now uses the centos repo to provide their sources to the public. It is possible to get a free RH developer account (speaking of transparency, it took me a while to find the right banner to click on to actually get that free account ;p ), but the source code is only provided as 2 dvds and it is unclear to me where to find sources for updated packages. Or perhaps you have to download 2 dvds every time they update that image. Ouch. Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
On 12/13/2016 04:16 PM, Alice Wonder wrote:> I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when > the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec file > > # How to create the source tarball: > # > # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/ > # cd client/python-rhsm > # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgz > > Never used tito before, so I install it and try, and rather than giving > me the source package I need - it gives me a python traceback > complaining that I haven't configured some things properly. > > Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex > with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS > rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to > get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing > tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows. > > Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed > as source tarballs? > > Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would > reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp > on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksum > was identical. > > Guess those days are gone. > > /rantI am not sure what you are trying to accomplish .. but the tools to get an SRPM or the Sources from CentOS are dead simple. They are located here: https://git.centos.org/summary/centos-git-common.git And they are very easy .. and most are bash scripts. So: git clone https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!skopeo (that just happens to be what I am working on right now) cd skopeo git branch -a (so you can see the branches .. optional) git checkout c7-extras get_sources.sh ================ Now you have the full SRPM in the same directory structure as if you had installed the SRPM. If you would have used 'into_srpm.sh' instead of 'get_sources.sh' .. you would have the SRPM generated as well as the full tree. There are switches for the tools (-c for get_sources.sh to check the crc info for already downloaded files .. -d for into_srpm.sh for changing the dist tag of a generated SRPM, etc.) I use these tools for every package built for CentOS and they are very easy to use. Now, obviously that does not include development inside an extracted SRPM. But I normally just use diff (or git) to track changes and generate patches, etc. Thanks, Johnny Hughes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20161214/6c7a7c47/attachment-0001.sig>
Hello Johnny, On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 06:58 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:> So: > > git clone https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!skopeoApart from the syntax error because the exclamation mark is not escaped this leads nowhere. So I tried: $ git clone https://git.centos.org/git/rpms/skopeo.git> (that just happens to be what I am working on right now) > > cd skopeo > > git branch -a (so you can see the branches .. optional) > > git checkout c7-extrasSo far so good. We now got a spec file. Doing the same for bc: a spec file and patches. Still no source.> get_sources.shThe name suggests this is what we need (or do we??) If only I could find that script anywhere... So lets dig around a bit: skopeo]$ cat .gitignore SOURCES/skopeo-1f655f3.tar.gz bc]$ cat .gitignore SOURCES/bc-1.06.95.tar.bz2 python-rhsm]$ cat .gitignore SOURCES/python-rhsm-1.17.9.tar.gz I think this solves Alice's issue once the .gitignore file is fixed. For some reason the tarballs seem to be ignored. Something I need to fix in my git config or is it at your end? Regards, Leonard. -- mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research