2015-03-28 13:26 GMT-03:00 Jonathan Underwood <jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx>: > On 28 March 2015 at 15:07, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade > <paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andrade@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I maintained a slowly evolving approach in Mandriva for some years, >> (but now it is quickly approaching one year I left Mandriva...), see the >> main script at >> https://abf.rosalinux.ru/openmandriva/texlive-tlpkg/blob/master/tlpobj2spec.pl >> It uses the texlive perl modules to do most of the work, and only does >> some filtering on contents, choosing %doc (what texlive calls doc >> and source), extracting dependencies or license information, %post >> scripts, etc. >> > > This looks really handy. I wonder though about the need to really have > one RPM per texlive package.Would it not be a reasonable middle ground > to generate one SRPM per texlive collection? Having 1 to 1, rpm packages matching texlive packages has its advantages, it comes with dependencies easy to generate, and one can update a 1-2k single package easily. But creating almost 3k packages to "bootstrap" could be quite disturbing. One package per collection should be quite doable as well, and could still make a perl script, to make it easy to convert texlive packages metadata to rpm packages, using the texlive perl modules. An example of how it looks like when having one package per texlive package is: https://abf.rosalinux.ru/openmandriva/texlive-collection-fontsrecommended/blob/master/texlive-collection-fontsrecommended.spec The above is a meta package, only with dependencies. The above also is an example of what the script did when there was no license information (it did trust whatever texlive choose), and used a link to a license file, what may not be a good idea. An example of an actual package, not a "meta package": https://abf.rosalinux.ru/openmandriva/texlive-tetex/blob/master/texlive-tetex.spec and as well, another example of dubious license tag :( This one is a more standard one, regarding licenses: https://abf.rosalinux.ru/openmandriva/texlive-latex/blob/master/texlive-latex.spec >> It is quite a lot of work, so, it would be better to have a SIG and >> not let only one person handle all packages. >> > > I would be interested in joining such a SIG and effort. me too :) > Jonathan Thanks, Paulo -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
