Author Topic: [FINETUNING] Learn E17 packaging discussion  (Read 2674 times)

Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #45 on: February 26, 2013, 09:29:39 PM »
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/e_dbus-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/ecore-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/edje-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/eet-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/eeze-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/efreet-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/eina-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/eio-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/elementary-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/embryo-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/emotion-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/enlightenment-20130104-2slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/ethumb-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/evas_generic_loaders-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37931428/E17/SRPM/evas-20130104-1slingshot2013.src.rpm
----------------
Recommended install order:
    Eina
    Eet
    Evas
    Evas_Generic_Loaders
    Ecore
    Eio
    Embryo
    Edje
    Efreet
    E_Dbus
    Eeze
    Emotion
    Ethumb
    Elementary
    Enlightenment (etc.)
----------
KNOWN ISSUES:
-Numerous :) including but not limited to packaging .la files, improperly filled BuildRequires and Requires, some unknown dependencies removed just because I do not know what they are doing eg (key-utils), licenses may not be proper because some individual packages use different licensing, optional dependencies - whether to be added or not, some dependencies which are mentioned in the prototype .spec included in the source but are still not released eg. EXOTIC, EPDF etc etc.
--------
No themes are there at present.
--------
Gadgets / widgets are not functional or are missing some components
--------
So many issues. My idea was to get to the desktop once, and then go back to each package from the beginning iterating until things look good.
--------
Also there is the issue of naming convention regarding .spec file. These .spec files are NOT following PCLinuxOS convention. I have used my nick-package-01 where 01 is the private version of .spec currently in use. This helped me to keep 3 .spec files side by side - mine, PCLinuxOS's and the prototype .spec which came with the package.
When the final version is ready for submission the .spec file could be renamed to PCLinuxOS standards.
--------
Regarding the %mkrel x, I would like to use it internally to increment and update package version during testing here and it should be reset to 1 once the pclinuxos.spec is submitted.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2013, 09:31:46 PM by sling-shot »
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #46 on: February 26, 2013, 09:33:53 PM »
I do not know what do they mean by Enlightenment (etc) may be the etc refers to additional themes and widgets/gadgets?
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #47 on: February 27, 2013, 02:52:30 AM »
Hi,

i fixed libraw for evas generic loaders rebuild and install it from the version i put into the dropbox and it will work.

i compiled now everything and i'm going to test it.

regards
ghostbunny
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #48 on: February 27, 2013, 03:26:18 AM »
Ok i think i located the cause of the error on start up. there is something wrong in the default e17 theme.

my first impressions are good. i have do some little fixes in your specs (mostly remove of the comment symbol in front of necessary build requires but also little tweak to get the session files installed in the right direction).

question why didn't you use the pclos e srpm instead of creating a new spec?

the requirement you mentioned e.g. epdf arn't released they have been check out of the svn directly. but after a little check of the e17 site they replaced subversion by git and there a lot of things missing i think but you can choose the repo version of epdf.
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #49 on: February 27, 2013, 03:46:51 AM »
(mostly remove of the comment symbol in front of necessary build requires
Please note that this is part of my study. I commented out everything for which there was no documentation anywhere in the README, CONFIGURE.AC, INSTALL or any other instruction files given with the package.
However there is a long list of requirements listed on the download page which I thought of considering during my second run.
For eg. the %files section almost always needed few tweaks.
Anyway I would need to learn how to build a .spec from scratch.

Quote
question why didn't you use the pclos e srpm instead of creating a new spec?
I did use that. Each and every .spec was written based on the PCLinuxOS .spec and modified w.r.t. to the default enclosed .spec and documentation read and watching the build log.
I commented out whatever looked unspecified for future reference.

Quote
the requirement you mentioned e.g. epdf arn't released they have been check out of the svn directly. but after a little check of the e17 site they replaced subversion by git and there a lot of things missing i think but you can choose the repo version of epdf.
I did use the repo version of EPDF and it seems to work alright.

For many things that confused me or confounded me, I asked in the #e channel on Freenode and they were very helpful. Eg. xcb issue, EPDF. There they said EPDF could be disabled and use POPPLER instead. I have also put some other things gleaned from #e to work here.

One thing that bothers me when I try to follow an existing PCLinuxOS .spec is that I do not understand many things and there is no explanation. I did not understand the line with 'perl' in the e.spec.
----------
I have many many more questions if you have the patience ;)
« Last Edit: February 27, 2013, 03:49:03 AM by sling-shot »
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #50 on: February 27, 2013, 04:09:05 AM »
(mostly remove of the comment symbol in front of necessary build requires
Please note that this is part of my study. I commented out everything for which there was no documentation anywhere in the README, CONFIGURE.AC, INSTALL or any other instruction files given with the package.


yes but if there is e.g.  the rpmbuild output Requires: libeina.so.0 so the program is linked against libeina.so what means that you will require eina-devel.

Quote
the requirement you mentioned e.g. epdf arn't released they have been check out of the svn directly. but after a little check of the e17 site they replaced subversion by git and there a lot of things missing i think but you can choose the repo version of epdf.
I did use the repo version of EPDF and it seems to work alright.

For many things that confused me or confounded me, I asked in the #e channel on Freenode and they were very helpful. Eg. xcb issue, EPDF. There they said EPDF could be disabled and use POPPLER instead. I have also put some other things gleaned from #e to work here.

so i would prefer to enable poppler when epdf is more or less deprecated.


One thing that bothers me when I try to follow an existing PCLinuxOS .spec is that I do not understand many things and there is no explanation. I did not understand the line with 'perl' in the e.spec.
----------
I have many many more questions if you have the patience ;)

i think you mean this line

Code: [Select]
perl -pi -e 's|/lib|/%{_lib}||g' src/bin/e_start_main.cthis line means replace the occurrences of /lib by /%{_lib} this is required for 64bit build but i can't say whether this is still necessary. and this change shall be done in the file /src/bin/e_start_main.c

this perl usage is like using the programs sed or awk.

regards
ghostbunny
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #51 on: February 27, 2013, 05:52:03 AM »
i found a further thing while testing.

we should compile enlightenment with pam. without it we are not able to lock the screen/system
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #52 on: February 28, 2013, 02:34:25 AM »
sorry for the delay here the first round of fixed srpms

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/53507975/e17/e17-srpms.tar.xz
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #53 on: February 28, 2013, 08:50:37 AM »
You are killing me with 50 MB+ archives :( my VirtualMachine might crap anytime during the download.
Let use only share the .spec file if you do not mind? Rest of the things I already have setup here.
----
The average download speed I get is 25 KBps.
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #54 on: February 28, 2013, 10:56:28 AM »
Ok here are just the specs

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/53507975/e17/e17-specs.tar.xz

Note: That are all specs but i think i haven't made changes in all specs. I added my changes in your changelog entry and wrote "(ghostbunny)" behind it.
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #55 on: February 28, 2013, 12:13:18 PM »
I checked the .specs. I did not understand some of the changes. I think I will go through the logs again and if I still do not understand I will ask here.
I will include your changes and do another round of builds.

In addition I will also look into some optional packages that were avilable on the download page but were not in the recommended build order.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2013, 12:16:08 PM by sling-shot »
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #56 on: March 02, 2013, 09:47:45 AM »
I am not getting enough time in front of my desktop where all my packaging virtual machine is.

I have tried to solve the problem of why Enlightenment is not getting picked up as a window manager by KDM. Could not get anywhere.
So the current option is only to put a .desktop file into /usr/share/apps/kdm/sessions. But what about other .isos such as LXDE - do they use KDM or another session manager?

If others can pick up Enlightenment from %_sysconfdir/X11/wmsession.d/23E17 then we could just another entry appropriate for KDM also as backup.
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #57 on: March 02, 2013, 03:14:03 PM »
use my modified spec for enlightenment and the problem should be solved.

on the lxde iso gdm is used as display manager (kdm, gdm, xdm, lxdm,... are display managers). most desktop environments have their own session manager e.g. lxsession, xfce4-session,....

the session is not picked up from %_sysconfdir/X11/wmsession.d/23E17 in this directory are just the "prototypes" from which the correct entry will be created (by using %make_session in the %post part of the enlightenment spec)

regards
ghostbunny
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD


Offline sling-shot

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1730
  • Satyameva Jayate | Truth Alone Triumphs.
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #58 on: March 03, 2013, 03:03:56 AM »
use my modified spec for enlightenment and the problem should be solved.

I do not see any difference other than fixing up the BuildRequires. What am I missing here?
-----
EDIT : I missed that %postun section regarding the session. How does that fix things?
-----
The "Requires" section could be removed because it is automatically generated by RPM find-requires?
« Last Edit: March 03, 2013, 03:09:48 AM by sling-shot »
Packaging well will cure headaches of many :) But learning to package will cause headaches in many :(

AMD AthlonX2 3600+/ASUS M2NPV-VM/ATi HD4670/Onboard sound/3.5GB DDR2-533 RAM/SEAGATE 160+320GB HDD/DELL S2240L FullHD/Creative SBS370 2.1/PCLinuxOS2013/KDE4
Samsung NP305U1-A06IN | Nokia E6

Offline ghostbunny

  • PCLinuxOS Tester
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1165
Re: [SUCCESS] Learn E17 packaging discussion
« Reply #59 on: March 03, 2013, 07:18:22 AM »
Quote
EDIT : I missed that %postun section regarding the session. How does that fix things?

like i tied to explain in my other posting.

%make_session generates, dependent on the chosen display manager, the right session entry in /etc/X11/dm/Sessions or /usr/share/apps/kdm/sessions for this the "template" %_sysconfdir/X11/wmsession.d/23E17 is used.


Quote
The "Requires" section could be removed because it is automatically generated by RPM find-requires?
That's right i checked it everything is detected by the build system and an explicit defining of this requirements in the spec file is not necessary.
The full life is a big mess

PS:
I'm German. Sorry because of possible mistakes in my written messages xD