Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Issues using spec2scl --meta-specfile on copr #33

Open
ibotty opened this issue Jul 19, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Issues using spec2scl --meta-specfile on copr #33

ibotty opened this issue Jul 19, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

@ibotty
Copy link
Contributor

ibotty commented Jul 19, 2017

It was necessary to use this pull request, i.e. this partial patch:

-%scl_package %scl
+%{?scl_package:%scl_package %scl}
 [...]
-Name: %scl_name
+Name: %scl 

Is that correct? If so, I can provide a patch (afaict it's only necessary to change it in templates/metapackage.spec).

@irushchyshyn
Copy link
Collaborator

spec2scl follows the recommendations and examples documented in the SCL packaging guide, therefore I am reluctant to do this change here.
And in your example, should not Name be changed to something like
Name: %{?scl_name}%{!?scl_name:%scl}?

@ibotty
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibotty commented Jul 19, 2017

I have absolutely no clue, and that's the first scl I am building.

Having said that, copr folks said, that the patch above is what's required to build on copr. Your change is of course more reasonable (and will make it work for copr and be as before whenever scl_name is defined). I'd really like to understand what's happening here. What's %scl_name vs %scl? If the meta package is to be installed without scl-utils-build, why does it use the %scl_package macro?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants