port of game-data-packager to Fedora

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 07-11-15 18:23, Alexandre Detiste wrote:
> Le mercredi 4 novembre 2015, 13:01:51 Hans de Goede a écrit :
>>> So for now I'll just use/suggest the innoextract package provided by upstream.
>>
>> I do not think this is a good idea, we really want to do this properly.
>
> Ok I'll start with this one, because:
> - it's the most usefull utility of the two
> - the most stable too
> - I can just re-use existing specfile (I have already pinged upstream about this)
>
> https://github.com/arx/ArxPackages/blob/master/innoextract/rpm/innoextract.spec

Ok, for those reading along this one is being reviewed here now:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279175

>> I've taken a quick look, packaging rhash should be easy, it comes
>> with Makefile-s which properly generate versioned .so libs with a
>> proper soname at all, and honor DESTDIR, so packaging it really is
>> not a big deal. And this will actually be a good exercise for showing
>> that you know the basics of rpm packaging, which is requires to
>> become a Fedora / rpmfusion packager.
>
>
>
>> As for htmlcxx it does not come with a buildsys at all, and:
>
> Huh ? The one in Debian uses autoconf
>
> https://sources.debian.net/src/htmlcxx/0.85-3.4/configure.ac
>
> https://sources.debian.net/src/htmlcxx/0.85-3.4/debian/rules
>
> So that's just a 2-lines build there; the remainder is for the manpage.
>
> %:
> 	dh $@ --with autoreconf
>
>
>> https://github.com/dhoerl/htmlcxx
>
> That one seems to be something totally unrelated.

Ok my bad, if it uses autoconf and a straight-forward build, then by
all means do package it for Fedora.

>> So this is what in Fedora we call a copylib, and bundling those is ok,
>
>> esp. when upstream does not provide any sort of (API) versioning
>> what so ever.
> ... so this point doesn't apply.
>
>
>> So you can simply put a snapshot of this in the
>> same src.rpm as innoextract / lgogdownloader,
>> and use that directly.
>
> lgogdownloader is the current _single_ reverse dependency for this in
> Debian, still I'd prefer to do it properly.
> There, this one is not maitained by the Games team for example;
> it was packaged by someone else years before lgogdownloader even existed.
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=504222
>
> So I'd prefer to keep it separate; this part will likely require less uploads;
> only when GCC decide to break all C++ packages.

Ack, as said if it is a proper lib with autoconf packaging it separately
makes perfect sense.

>>> I wouldn't fight over inclusion of this or G-D-P in Debian main,
>>> so here also I won't either.
>>>
>>> I already got 2 relevant answers here before posting to rpmfusion ML:
>>>
>>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/games/2015-November/thread.html
>>
>> Ok, forget my previous comment asking to put this in Fedora then, lets
>> just put these 2 in rpmfusion nonfree. I still believe that innoextract belongs
>> in Fedora proper, so a first step at getting g-d-p in rpmfusion would be
>> to get innoextract into Fedora, see:
>
> Extra hint: InnoSetup (the packager) is free software, albeit windows-only.
> https://github.com/jrsoftware/issrc/blob/master/license.txt
>
> I'll do that; I'll send the mail to fedora-devel
>
>> I can act as a sponsor for you in Fedora. I believe this is the best
>> way to process because of 2 reasons:
>>
>> 1) rpmfusion currently is overhauling its infra, so getting any new
>> pkgs in atm is kinda hard
>> 2) rpmfusion requires a sponsor process for non Fedora packages just
>> like the Fedora process, but once you're an official Fedora packager
>> you get the same rights in rpmfusion automatically
>>
>> Note the list at:
>>
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers
>>
>> Looks much longer / more complicated then the process actually is a lot
>> of steps are very quick. The most work is finding a sponsor (done already :)
>> and getting a few initial packages reviewed by your sponsor (that would be me).
>
> I'm already at the "koji build --scratch f23 rpmbuild/SRPM/innoextract-1.5-1.fc23.src.rpm" step ;-)

Great :)

Regards,

Hans