On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 02:05:10PM +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 12:59:36PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 01:56:43PM +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 12:54:09PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 01:52:33PM +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 01:22:17PM -0400, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > > > One specfile containing both native and mingw builds is the
> > > > > new best practice for Fedora. This reduces the maint burden
> > > > > and ensures the mingw packages don't fall behind.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > .gitlab-ci.yml | 2 +-
> > > > > libvirt.spec.in | 287
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > meson.build | 17 +--
> > > > > mingw-libvirt.spec.in | 327
------------------------------------------
> > > > > 4 files changed, 293 insertions(+), 340 deletions(-)
> > > > > delete mode 100644 mingw-libvirt.spec.in
> > > >
> > > > The patch looks good but there are some changes not mentioned
directly.
> > > >
> > > > With this patch we will build MinGW packages by default on Fedora.
Not
> > > > sure if that is desirable. I would rather have it the other way
around
> > > > if it works for Fedora best practice.
> > >
> > > Fedora has shipped the native & mingw builds for years now. This just
> > > merges them into one spec. There's no change in what we actually
build
> > > from Fedora POV. Or am I misunderstanding what you mean ?
> >
> > From Fedora POV everything is probably the same but for everybody else
> > this might be regression that would require using the --define as we
> > need to do for gitlab-ci.
>
> IMHO if a contributor using the upstream spec to build RPMs, they need
> to just deal with whatever the current packaging has defined. Ultimately
> you can still do 'dnf builddep' to get the list of deps installeds,
> including the mingw ones now.
I just wanted to point it out as it was not mentioned in the commit
message and might not be obvious from the code itself. Since I don't
have a strong opinion about this change
Reviewed-by: Pavel Hrdina <phrdina(a)redhat.com>
I'll add a line to the commit message mentioning that RPM builds now
need extra BRs to be installed.
With regards,
Daniel
--
|:
https://berrange.com -o-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|:
https://libvirt.org -o-
https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|:
https://entangle-photo.org -o-
https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|