Need help with making RPM from v2.x.x branch

[Fajar A. Nugraha]

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:28 AM, John Dennis <jdennis at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> These project maintained build configurations are best thought of as
> "bleeding edge developer stuff". Make some change and you want to test on
> Fedora or Debian and need packages, then these build directories are the
> goto place, Or for those cases where a distribution has not caught up with
> upstream yet, then this can serve a useful purpose as well (as long as they
> stay generic, see below), another variant of the "this is only for the
> latest and greatest".
>
>
You've pretty much covered it.


>
> My suggestion is for upstream FreeRADIUS to maintain a generic Red Hat RPM
> spec file which is vanilla as possible without any patches whatsoever. In
> theory current upstream shouldn't need patches. Also any customization we
> might do really should come from us, not upstream. If one is building an
> RPM from the current FreeRADIUS version using the FreeRADIUS RPM spec file
> then one should get a vanilla FreeRADIUS build whose only customization
> extends to assuring the same file locations, package names, etc. are used.
> You pretty much get this for free. I would take an existing spec file strip
> out all the patches, changelog, etc. and then one only needs to take a look
> at the options passed to configure (I'm thinking about options which
> control which modules are built).
>
>

IMHO some of it (e.g. changelog, patches for cert config) is/was necessary.

My use case was that I wanted the build to be as much drop-in as possible,
so I can (for example) upgrade to 2.2.1 as soon as possible when it comes
out, but switch to Red Hat's official RPM when it's available, without
having to change my config. Without some of the patches, I'd need to modify
my config file as well.



> Would we like to maintain the ./redhat subdirectory?
>
> No, for two reasons.
>
> 1. It's impossible, as pointed out above there is no single spec file,
> each spec file is tied to a specific release. We maintain *independent*
> spec files for *every* distribution version we support, at the moment that
> numbers in the dozens :-(
>
>
Yeah. Before 2.2.0 was out, I made sure that I can build RPMs for RHEL5 and
6 (because that's what I use), and submit the necessary changes upstream.
It seems to be enough (i.e. those two versions made up for most who need to
build a Red Hat RPM), because IIRC there hasn't been a mail to the list
about "I need to build FR 2.2.0 RPM for X flavor or Red Hat but the
included spec file doesn't work".



> 2. We already maintain them and they are publicly available for anyone to
> download. Trying to maintain multiple copies in multiple repositories and
> assuring they all stay in sync doesn't seem justified.
>
>
Thanks for the effort.

If no one else does this first, I'd probably submit patches to make FR debs
and RPMs build cleanly before 2.2.1 is out (need to dig out my lxc
templates first). That way at least people can build packages for released
version.

-- 
Fajar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freeradius.org/pipermail/freeradius-users/attachments/20130507/14f558bb/attachment.html>