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

Re: sdcc - Cross Compiler, Needs Packaging Standards?

glibc.src.rpm 15.6MB
gcc.src.rpm 39MB

Hans de Goede wrote:
   b) *** Warning dirty hack ***
      Test for the existence of the tarbal in RPM_SOURCE_DIR in %prep
      and if it isn't there bail with a message howto get the tarbal
      from the srpms for the native packages. We can use the sources


The files are available if you know the exact URL, which is possible to figure out from the CVS module of the original SRPM and hash.

      file and the look-aside cache to make the test for the tarbal
      succeed on the buildsys. Advantages: saves tons of diskspace.

Right, this is not problematic at all to our own buildsys. This might be a useful optimization for other cases. For example, where plugins need the original source tarball to build.

      Disadvantage: slight inconvienience for people trying to rebuild
      the srpm's manually. Large inconvienience for people doing
      automated rebuilds (aurora for example)

This need not be inconvenient for manual builders and other automated rebuilds. We only need an evil auto-downloader, but make it disabled by default. Then manual or automated rebuilders can choose to enable evil by setting an environment variable $AUTO_GRAB_SOURCE if they want to automate it. Otherwise it tells the user exactly what to do.

BuildRequires: auto-grab-source

%setup -q

The pseudocode of this tool
if file exists and matches hash
  return 0
  if $AUTO_GRAB_SOURCE == true
     attempt to grab
     display instructive error message about what to do

Is this too evil and ugly?

Is this evilness worth avoiding 50MB+ of extra .src.rpm for all mirrors to throw around?

I don't have any opinion either way. This does not effect our own buildsys, or anybody else building packages directly from CVS.

Warren Togami
wtogami redhat com

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