On 06-11-2023 12:32, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 11/6/23 02:00, Sandro wrote:
On 05-11-2023 16:00, Sérgio Basto wrote:
During review of a package I submitted [1], the reviewer asked me to
move running an `ant` script from %prep to %build.
This is correct IMHO ,
if you run `fedpkg prep` on directory where you heave the spec file of
the package (in a git-dist), you wont be able to get "Local test
rpmbuild prep" if you haven't ant installed on the system.
And why is that an issue I should be concerned about?
It's an honest question. When running the full build with `fedpkg
mockbuild`, all BRs from the spec file will be installed first, before
%prep is executed.
for exemplify :
fedpkg clone eclipse-swt
cd eclipse-swt
fedpkg prep
I know plenty of Python packages that need to apply some git foo in
%prep. These would also fail the exercise if git-core were not
installed on the host system.
I'm not sure why `fedpkg prep` just fails, while `fedpkg install` will
happily tell you what dependencies are missing.
The idea is that %prep only unpacks (which is useful to looking at the
sources) so it doesn't need dependencies beyond those of rpmbuild
itself. Once upon a time rpm was changed to ignore buildrequires for
prep with this rationale, but it's a flawed one: technically, packages
are free to use whatever tooling they need to do what they need in %prep
as much as any other section. And to do that they'd must be able to
express those dependencies.
Thank you, Panu. I conclude from that, that it is okay to have
(justified) BRs that are needed for %prep, just like git-core is
frequently required for Python packages, needing to tag trees in %prep
for dynamic versioning tools like Versioneer.
-- Sandro
_______________________________________________
packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-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/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
