[PD-dev] RPM spec for Pd

[Vitaly Dolgov]

The archive with CCRMA's spec is here -- 
<http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/mirror/fedora/linux/planetccrma/32/SRPMS/puredata-0.51.0-1.fc32.ccrma.src.rpm>

I found it's way more complicated than mine. There are several patches, 
all the files to install are listed explicitly in separate packages 
(-core, -gui, -extra, etc.), there is even a desktop shortcut! So it 
quite serious, and I guess, it's the right way of doing the spec for 
the distro. But I'm not sure if you want to include all that patches to 
the master branch.

What I was trying to do is to "make install" system-wide with the 
option of rollback, using package manager. Certainly, this is not the 
best way to do it, but, it seems, that the old spec in linux/ directory 
shares my intention.

Maybe it's better just to delete spec from the repo? As it anyway won't 
build on modern systems :)

Thank you,
Vitaly

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 18:32, Claude Heiland-Allen 
<claude at mathr.co.uk> wrote:
> Perhaps Planet CCRMA At Home [1] has newer RPM specs?  I think they 
> have Pd 0.47 (2019) [2]
> 
> [1] <http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/>
> [2] 
> <http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/mirror/fedora/linux/planetccrma/30/x86_64/repoview/letter_p.group.html>
> 
> On 25/02/2021 17:33, Miller Puckette via Pd-dev wrote:
>> Cool!  I'd better wait until Iohannes (the deb maintainer) verifies 
>> that
>> that "-r" doesn't break debian packaging.  I long ago stopped being 
>> able to
>> follow the autotools build system - it's all I can do to watch over 
>> the c
>> source itself.
>> 
>> If the Makefile.am fix turns out to be OK with everyone, I'd be glad 
>> to update
>> the "rpmspec" junk in the Pd dist to whatever you end up with.  
>> Perhaps we
>> can then get Pd included in fedora.
>> 
>> cheers
>> Miller
>> 
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 07:57:51PM +0300, Vitaly Dolgov wrote:
>>> Hi, everybody!
>>> 
>>> Recently I was working on an RPM spec for Fedora as it doesn't have 
>>> an
>>> officially maintained package, so I began to write my own. The spec 
>>> is
>>> fairly simple, but there is the only one problem I want to discuss 
>>> with you.
>>> 
>>> In src/Makefile.am on line 400 there is command for absolute 
>>> symlink, which
>>> is an error for RPM package builder, so I fixed it with the 
>>> following patch
>>> before starting build:
>>> 
>>> @@ -400 +400 @@
>>> -	$(LN_S) $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/pd $(DESTDIR)$(libpdbindir)/pd
>>> +	$(LN_S) -r $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/pd $(DESTDIR)$(libpdbindir)/pd
>>> 
>>> I was trying to be as close as possible to INSTALL.txt, but I'm a 
>>> newbie in
>>> Pd development as well as in RPM spec writing, so I can do 
>>> everything
>>> completely wrong. I'm sorry if that's the case.
>>> 
>>> Is it possible to fix the aforementioned issue upstream or is there 
>>> a better
>>> way to approach this problem?
>>> 
>>> I also noticed that there is an RPM spec in linux/ directory in 
>>> repo, but is
>>> seems it was not updated for 14 years or so. Is there any chance 
>>> you update
>>> it in a future?
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> Vitaly
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pd-dev mailing list
>>> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-dev at lists.iem.at>
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev__;!!Mih3wA!RhBj6rGNn0U0W3nzFlN8_iXD5T6bqN_FldvL5AboQ4YyK9CBSZMIASdSO6O0$>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pd-dev mailing list
>> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-dev at lists.iem.at>
>> <https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-dev at lists.iem.at>
> <https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20210226/acd5db4d/attachment.htm>