hi, at the beginning i was active on this list but there was some other important stuff. but now it seems we need it again. so what is the current status? i see there are new packages mingw- is there any docs. what should we've to know? etc thanks.
On 05/24/2011 04:06 PM, Farkas Levente wrote:
hi, at the beginning i was active on this list but there was some other important stuff. but now it seems we need it again. so what is the current status? i see there are new packages mingw- is there any docs. what should we've to know? etc thanks.
anybody? what's the mingw- and mingw32 packages? do you plan to support rhel-6? does the current infrastructure use any special feature (like rpm-4.9) which is not available on el6? i see on http://svn.openftd.org/viewvc/Fedora%20Cross%20Compiler%20Framework/ there're both mingw and mingw32 pacakges why? do you plan to add epel-6 support for these packages? we need mingw support on rhel-6 so we'd like to create packages for all gstreamer related packages which can be used on rhel-6. thanks in advance. regards.
On 05/25/2011 02:40 PM, Farkas Levente wrote:
what's the mingw- and mingw32 packages?
Check out the example spec file: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW#Example_Specfile
Source packages are now named mingw- and binary packages are mingw32-. Jason Tibbitts explains the rationale for the change in the FPC ticket where he first proposed the change: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/83
do you plan to support rhel-6? does the current infrastructure use any special feature (like rpm-4.9) which is not available on el6?
The current example spec file works fine on both RHEL 6 and Fedora Rawhide. If you are only targeting rawhide, you can drop the following 3 lines from the spec file, but you don't have to if you want to keep the spec files in RHEL 6 and Rawhide in sync.
%global _use_internal_dependency_generator 0 %global __find_requires %{_mingw32_findrequires} %global __find_provides %{_mingw32_findprovides}
i see on http://svn.openftd.org/viewvc/Fedora%20Cross%20Compiler%20Framework/ there're both mingw and mingw32 pacakges why?
This is Eric's personal test repository and doesn't reflect what's currently in Fedora.
do you plan to add epel-6 support for these packages?
Current guidelines work fine for both EPEL and rawhide, but I'm personally not interested in maintaining mingw packages in EPEL; you are of course very welcome to do so.
we need mingw support on rhel-6 so we'd like to create packages for all gstreamer related packages which can be used on rhel-6.
That's great! There's already a mingw-gstreamer review request by a new contributor. I guess you could start by reviewing that: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704635
Target the current guidelines and everything should work fine on RHEL.
Current guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW
Hope this helps, Kalev
On 05/25/2011 03:44 PM, Kalev Lember wrote:
On 05/25/2011 02:40 PM, Farkas Levente wrote:
do you plan to support rhel-6? does the current infrastructure use any special feature (like rpm-4.9) which is not available on el6?
The current example spec file works fine on both RHEL 6 and Fedora Rawhide. If you are only targeting rawhide, you can drop the following 3 lines from the spec file, but you don't have to if you want to keep the spec files in RHEL 6 and Rawhide in sync.
%global _use_internal_dependency_generator 0 %global __find_requires %{_mingw32_findrequires} %global __find_provides %{_mingw32_findprovides}
my biggest problem now that you start to rewrite all fedora packages to support only fedora. the template is ok but as you remove all 'not necessary part' from spec. it's no longer build on rhel-6. since first i've to recreate the whole mingw infrastructure for rhel-6. so i'd like to update gcc, binutils, filesystem etc. not to mention those dozens of other basic packages. and as you remove such lines: ------------------------------ BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) ------------------------------ at the beginning of %install ------------------------------ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ------------------------------ ------------------------------ %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ------------------------------ and yes i know these are no longer required on fedora, but unfortunately thay are required on rhel. these are usually 2-3 lines of changes, but with these changes these src.rpms no longer be able to rebuild on rhel. which imho not worth. this only cause a lots of work anyone else. with these small changes all target's spec can be keep in sync and an everybody can enjoy others help. in the current case it's just cause a lots of work for others... now as rh start to support mingw: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2011-0671.html wouldn't it be possible to keep these packages in sync? regards.
Farkas Levente schreef op ma 30-05-2011 om 14:58 [+0200]:
so i'd like to update gcc, binutils, filesystem etc.
I'm afraid that will be a no-go. The EPEL guidelines state that packages may only be part of EPEL when they aren't part of RHEL. As the base mingw32-* packages are now part of RHEL (be it as a technology preview) we aren't allowed to bundle them in EPEL anymore... Only packages which aren't part of RHEL (yet) may be added to EPEL.
See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies for more details about this subject
Kind regards,
Erik van Pienbroek
On 05/30/2011 08:42 PM, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
Farkas Levente schreef op ma 30-05-2011 om 14:58 [+0200]:
so i'd like to update gcc, binutils, filesystem etc.
I'm afraid that will be a no-go. The EPEL guidelines state that packages may only be part of EPEL when they aren't part of RHEL. As the base mingw32-* packages are now part of RHEL (be it as a technology preview) we aren't allowed to bundle them in EPEL anymore... Only packages which aren't part of RHEL (yet) may be added to EPEL.
See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies for more details about this subject
but all other packages can... anyway your repo: http://svn.openftd.org seems to be down:-(
Farkas Levente schreef op wo 25-05-2011 om 13:40 [+0200]:
On 05/24/2011 04:06 PM, Farkas Levente wrote:
hi, at the beginning i was active on this list but there was some other important stuff. but now it seems we need it again. so what is the current status? i see there are new packages mingw- is there any
docs.
what should we've to know? etc thanks.
anybody? what's the mingw- and mingw32 packages? do you plan to support rhel-6? does the current infrastructure use any special feature (like rpm-4.9) which is not available on el6? i see on http://svn.openftd.org/viewvc/Fedora%20Cross%20Compiler%20Framework/ there're both mingw and mingw32 pacakges why? do you plan to add epel-6 support for these packages? we need mingw support on rhel-6 so we'd like to create packages for
all
gstreamer related packages which can be used on rhel-6. thanks in advance. regards.
Hi,
We don't have any clear plans yet for RHEL-6. We've seen that several mingw32-* packages have been added to the RHEL-6 bugzilla recently, so they probably have forked some of our Fedora mingw32-* packages (based on the mingw.org toolchain) but we don't know what other plans RH has with these packages. We also don't know exactly if they want to provide enterprise support on these mingw.org-based packages. My guess is that they want to wait for us to introduce the mingw-w64 toolchain in Fedora so that they can also introduce it in RHEL-6 and support it for the long-term. But as already indicated, I don't know anything for certain as I ain't an RH employee.
The packages which are now in my testing repo don't use any RPM 4.9 tricks yet, so these packages should also work on RHEL-6 (I don't have access to an RHEL-6/CentOS-6 environment so I can't test this yet). You might have to rebuild the gcc and binutils packages for RHEL-6, but other than that the packages should work just fine.
Kind regards,
Erik van Pienbroek
On 05/24/2011 05:06 PM, Farkas Levente wrote:
hi, at the beginning i was active on this list but there was some other important stuff. but now it seems we need it again. so what is the current status? i see there are new packages mingw- is there any docs. what should we've to know? etc
Hi Farkas,
Glad to have you back, there have indeed been some new developments.
Erik has been working on switching over from mingw.org toolchain to the mingw-w64 one. Among other things, the mingw-w64 toolchain has a much wider win32 API coverage and supports both 32 bit and 64 bit Windows targets.
The Fedora Packaging Committee has already approved guidelines for the mingw-w64 toolchain, but the guidelines are currently on hold until the toolchain is actually imported in Fedora (there are some possible legal problems with the new toolchain that are being investigated). Right now the current guidelines are the ones under Packaging:MinGW [1] and the ones under Packaging:MinGW_Future [2] are on hold; not sure when that might change.
One of the things that changes with the "MinGW_Future" guidelines is that the source packages are going to move into mingw- namespace and the binary packages are going to be named mingw32- and mingw64- respectively.
To ease the transition and to avoid having to rename packages from mingw32- to mingw- in the future when the "MinGW_Future" guidelines are activated, the FPC recently decided to also allow new source packages (keep in mind that we are still using the "old" guidelines) to be named mingw-. The example spec file [3] covers how to do that.
Another development is the mingw32-filesystem we have in rawhide now supports RPM 4.9 new "fileattr" dependency generator, which means that packages can now drop the following boilerplate macros if they want to: %global _use_internal_dependency_generator 0 %global __find_requires %{_mingw32_findrequires} %global __find_provides %{_mingw32_findprovides}
Nothing changes for existing packages but it gives the option to remove these lines for the packagers that want to do so. I'm also planning to eventually backport the mingw32-filesystem changes to F15, so that people who need to keep rawhide and F15 spec files in sync, are able to do so. But F15 is already out and we should strictly limit the changes we are doing and concentrate new development in rawhide.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW_Future [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW#Example_Specfile
Hope this helps, Kalev
-
Erik van Pienbroek -
Farkas Levente -
Kalev Lember