Re: Status of the forge macros?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



In your example, the forge macros simplify the spec file only because a snapshot is involved; but the forge macros put the snapshot info in the Release field, which is still permissible but deprecated[1].

Without the forge macros, the spec file would admittedly be a little more complex. I would probably do something like the following:

%global commit   791953030836d39687688a8e7f1a3e708892cfa1
%global snapdate 20230420

Version: 1.2^%{snapdate}git%(echo '%{commit}' | cut -b -7)
Release: 1%{?dist}

URL: https://github.com/riscv/opensbi
Source: %{url}/archive/%{commit}/opensbi-%{commit}.tar.gz

%prep
%autosetup -n opensbi-%{commit}

If the need to package a snapshot goes away, then the utility of the forge macros does too, as the packaging without them is perhaps even simpler than wirh them:

Version: 1.2.12345
Release: 1%{?dist}

URL: https://github.com/riscv/opensbi
Source: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/opensbi-%{version}.tar.gz

%prep
%autosetup

[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#traditional-versioning

On Wed, May 24, 2023, at 9:32 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 09:56:30AM +0200, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
>> On 23/05/2023 19:27, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>> >... so today I was taking part in a package review which uses these
>> >macros and was surprised to be told that they are deprecated.
>> 
>> Their author left Fedora a few years ago. They're now unmaintained
>> and may be removed soon (see FPC ticket[1]).
>> 
>> [1]: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1270
>
> So the issue for me is I'm considering a new package (opensbi).  It is
> greatly(?) simplified by using the forge macros.  Nothing in official
> documentation says that new packages shouldn't use the forge macros,
> although the link above would add such a statement.  There seems to be
> disagreement in this thread about the best way forwards.
>
> Proposed spec:
> http://git.annexia.org/?p=fedora-reviews.git;a=blob;f=opensbi/opensbi.spec
>
> Rich.
>
> -- 
> Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat 
> http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
> Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
> Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
> build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux