>>>>> "JO" == Jordan Ogas <jogas@xxxxxxxx> writes:
JO> We would like users to be able to run the test suite without
JO> compiling. It seems like placing the test and example directories in
JO> libexec/charliecloud may be a reasonable approach.
I'd suggest not doing that. If you expect someone to run it, put it
somewhere where they can run it. That location would be /usr/bin, with
data in /usr/share or %_libdir as appropriate. You probably also want
it in a subpackage ("foo-tests" is a commonly used naming convention) so
that users don't have to install it if they don't want it.
I recall there was some issue where there was a desire to keep the files
together in some fashion. One common method of doing this is using a
subdirectory of %_libdir (so /usr/lib64/whateverpackage) and then
creating stub executables or symlinks in /usr/bin. For example, both
chromium and libreoffice do this.
Interestingly, dnf has taken the odd step of putting executables in
/usr/libexec and symlinking them into /usr/bin, which I personally find
quite bizarre
JO> Question: is this something I could handle in the spec file, e.g.,
JO> move the test suite directories as part of the %install section of
JO> the spec file?
Well, if you want anything to end up in the final generated RPM files
then you must place them somewhere under %buildroot in the %install
section, and then reference them in the %files section. Whether it's
the projects build infrastructure which installs them or just some
calls to cp is completely dependent on the software in question.
- J<
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
