How do you build a package in koji when the package requires itself to be available?

On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:55:14 +0200 Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On 08/27/2014 08:17 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > > How do you build a package in koji when the package requires itself > > to be available? > > I seen a lot of packages where it was needed for %check section. > If this is the situation (you have to investigate that). Just comment > out that BR and %check section. Build it. Then uncomment and build > again. Of course if you can put there %boostrap macro, you will easy > work for others. And you might try building an older version that didn't have yet the dependency first, then build the latest. You can also talk to the maintainers, because they should know how to resolve the cyclic dependency properly

2014-08-28 14:05 GMT+02:00 Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz&gt;: > On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:55:14 +0200 > Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> On 08/27/2014 08:17 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: >> > How do you build a package in koji when the package requires itself >> > to be available? >> >> I seen a lot of packages where it was needed for %check section. >> If this is the situation (you have to investigate that). Just comment >> out that BR and %check section. Build it. Then uncomment and build >> again. Of course if you can put there %boostrap macro, you will easy >> work for others. > > And you might try building an older version that didn't have yet the > dependency first, then build the latest. You can also talk to the > maintainers, because they should know how to resolve the cyclic > dependency properly So, a lot of options. Wouldn't it be better if we had a packaging guideline forcing the spec to either have something like a %bootstrap macro, or at least contain a comment _documenting_ how to bootstrap the package?

On 08/27/2014 08:17 PM, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > How do you build a package in koji when the package requires itself to > be available? I seen a lot of packages where it was needed for %check section. If this is the situation (you have to investigate that). Just comment out that BR and %check section.

On 08/28/2014 03:49 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Examples? At least in some cases these likely are packaging bugs. I was looking for those examples and I realized I lied a little. So corrections: I saw a lot of examples where BR had *circular* dependencies because of %check section.

For example whole Ruby On Rails stack. Huge amount of packages needs some rubygems for %check, but those rubygems need that original gem as BR of itself. E.g: rubygem-tilt, rubygem-thor, rubygem-fomatador, rubygem-rspec-expectations, rubygem-mocks, rubygem-rack-protection, rubygem-diff-lcs, rubygem-sinatra.