[PATCH STABLE] buildrpm: move creation of RPM directories from dockerrpm

[Mathias De Maré]

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Anton Shestakov <engored at ya.ru> wrote:

> 13.01.2016, 01:27, "Anton Shestakov" <engored at ya.ru>:
> > 13.01.2016, 00:25, "Mathias De Mar" <mathias.demare at gmail.com>:
> >>   # HG changeset patch
> >>   # User Mathias De Maré <mathias.demare at gmail.com>
> >>   # Date 1452145477 -3600
> >>   # Thu Jan 07 06:44:37 2016 +0100
> >>   # Branch stable
> >>   # Node ID e505b8864dd50b333edb14a7c37baa0cff9a8aba
> >>   # Parent 6c7d26cef0cda4752c02b7478f1270a84393510b
> >>   buildrpm: move creation of RPM directories from dockerrpm
> >>
> >>   Handling the creation of the RPM directories in buildrpm
> >>   is more consistent and takes care of non-docker builds as well.
> >>
> >>   diff --git a/contrib/buildrpm b/contrib/buildrpm
> >>   --- a/contrib/buildrpm
> >>   +++ b/contrib/buildrpm
> >>   @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
> >>        RPMPYTHONVER=%{nil}
> >>    fi
> >>
> >>   -mkdir -p $RPMBUILDDIR/SOURCES
> >>   +mkdir -p $RPMBUILDDIR/{SOURCES,BUILD,SRPMS,RPMS}
> >
> > Turns out {x,y} is a bashism, so sh creates a literal
> {SOURCES,BUILD,SRPMS,RPMS} directory.
> >
> > This is frustrating, but I've just tried buildrpm (via `make fedora21`)
> on a fedora 21 box in vagrant and packages/ looks like this:
> >
> > packages/
> > └── fedora21
> >     ├── mercurial-3.6.3-1+6c7d26cef0cd.src.rpm
> >     ├── mercurial-3.6.3-1+6c7d26cef0cd.x86_64.rpm
> >     └── mercurial-debuginfo-3.6.3-1+6c7d26cef0cd.x86_64.rpm
> >
> > So there's a chance we don't even need all these mkdir -p in buildrpm?
> Not sure, I'll try and find a usable centos5 image.
>
> Er, I should've been looking at rpmbuild/, it does have all the RPMS/,
> SRPMS/, etc. But I suspect everything newer than centos5 can create these
> directories on its own.
>
> So, I didn't manage to build the packages on centos5 due to either me
> never really it being an rpm-distro user or it being an awful derelict.
> Although `make docker-centos5` works.
>
> All in all, I think if you want to do a V2 without that bashism, go ahead,
> but considering that packages on centos6, 7 and fedora 21 already build
> fine (tried just now), I can't tell when the supposed positive effect of
> this patch would be noticeable. I feel kinda bad now about suggesting to
> move mkdir -p calls to buildrpm before me doing the research.
>
Hm, I might send a V2 for this then. The most important part (having a
working 'make docker-centos5') is already done, so this is a bit less
urgent to me.
I still agree with you though: buildrpm seems like the better location.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20160114/d1aa7fe8/attachment.html>