GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 697640
Any Autotool files provided
Last modified: 2013-11-21 18:20:30 UTC
Hi all. snappy-0.3 source tarball doesn't provide any pre-generated Autotool files. Currently, I must generate these files manually and, since a manual process by using aclocal, autoheader, automake, autoconf commands becomes more complex in Fedora packaging's environment, I wish ask you if you can include all Autotool files already in the origin source tarball. Greetings
Antonio, If you run ./autogen.sh the configure file and the rest are generated. Is this troublesome for you? Just confirming you know you can use that script to build. ./autogen.sh ; ./configure ; make ; make install Thanks :)
Hi Luis. >If you run ./autogen.sh the configure file and the rest are generated. Is this >troublesome for you? This is shortest way to do what I wish avoid. :) In future, I could be forced to regenerate Autotools files because, for example, of a release changing or to add additional patches for same reason. All that is already happening: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=autoconf >Just confirming you know you can use that script to build. I know. :)
Antonio, Do you have any experience setting up autotools for projects? I'm happy to accept any patches you have to fix this.
Honestly, no. Generally all Autotools pregenerated files are already included in a source tarball so it is an unusual procedure for me.
OK. I understand. Autotools isn't the nicest thing to learn :P I will get around to this sometime this week. Will let you know. Thanks for packaging this for Fedora.
>Thanks for packaging this for Fedora. Thank you too to be so fully available.
(In reply to comment #5) > > Autotools isn't the nicest thing to learn :P > > I will get around to this sometime this week. Will let you know. > > Thanks for packaging this for Fedora. Hi Luis. Any news ?
Sorry Antonio. Haven't found time to do this. Should do it before the end of the week.
(In reply to comment #3) > Antonio, > > Do you have any experience setting up autotools for projects? I'm happy to > accept any patches you have to fix this. Today, I have created all Autotools files to compile snappy; I send you the archive. They seem to work fine in RPM packaging. I hope they can help you.
Created attachment 242675 [details] snappy autotools files
Nothing happened here since Antonio provided the Autotools files half a year ago. Nevertheless, there was some Git activity in that time, I count a few commits from Luis in october. When we may expect the Autotools stuff gets into the Git? The review ticket for the Fedora package [1] is stalled and we like to continue there. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947640
Hello. I just pushed Antonio's pregenerated autotool files to snappy's git. https://git.gnome.org/browse/snappy/commit/?id=8ece98e0b8b7ea8e79b0d181fb8f79bd8895d3ed Antonio, Thanks very much and apologies for this being so delayed after is slid off my ToDo queue. Mario, Can you confirm this is OK and what you need? Thanks!
OK, this is what we need. No we can go ahead with the package review. Thanks!
Great! Let me know how the review goes.
(In reply to comment #14) > Great! > > Let me know how the review goes. Recently I've detected a bundled library, which is not allowed in Fedora. The folder ./ltdl contains that what Fedora ships as libtool-ltdl-devel. Packagers are forced to use system libraries instead of bundled ones, if possible. Well, there are some exceptions (gnulib etc.) but in almost all cases either the package has to be patched to use the system library, or in case it doesn't exist in Fedora yet, a new package for that library has to be provided. This doesn't affect the upstream development. It's your choice to bundle an external library if the license allows that. But now we need a patch for our package.
Mario, I added that because it was included in the tarball Antonio uploaded here. I've removed this library and updated the upstream repo. https://git.gnome.org/browse/snappy/commit/?id=cb5587c4f9f2ce7137f3107b82bedda91adef531 Is this what you needed?
(In reply to comment #16) > https://git.gnome.org/browse/snappy/commit/?id=cb5587c4f9f2ce7137f3107b82bedda91adef531 > > Is this what you needed? Yes, indeed. But now we have to test it without the bundled libltdl, maybe something more is now needed in BuildRequires. Waiting for Antonio's update.
That's fine. Keep me up to date :)
(In reply to comment #16) > Mario, > > I added that because it was included in the tarball Antonio uploaded here. > I've removed this library and updated the upstream repo. Right. It's been my mistake.
Antonio, No blame :) Just explaining myself. Thanks for packaging this and help to make upstream better for packaging.
The Fedora package has been approved [1] and is now on the road to the package repos. Usually it should be available in the testing branches next days. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947640#c14