On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Lubomir Kundrak <lkundrak@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would anyone be angry at me if I bootstrapped a package by encapsulating
> a binary rpm into srpm, importing it in CVS, building, and then
> rebuilding against itself?
>
> (The package in question is OpenJDK, which will be ready in a few days;
> hopefully one or two. It needs either itself or gcj 1.5.0 to build, and
> currently we only have gcj 1.4.2).
>

Hmmm.. I do not know enough about standards and procedures to say if I
would be angry. If its ok with Jesse or Mike McGrath I would say ok.
In either case, make sure you capture the steps in a bugzilla or some
sort of 'issue-tracker' so if we need to revisit or recreate its
covered.


--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

On Thursday 20 March 2008, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Lubomir Kundrak <lkundrak@redhat.com>
wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Would anyone be angry at me if I bootstrapped a package by encapsulating
> > a binary rpm into srpm, importing it in CVS, building, and then
> > rebuilding against itself?
> >
> > (The package in question is OpenJDK, which will be ready in a few days;
> > hopefully one or two. It needs either itself or gcj 1.5.0 to build, and
> > currently we only have gcj 1.4.2).
>
> Hmmm.. I do not know enough about standards and procedures to say if I
> would be angry. If its ok with Jesse or Mike McGrath I would say ok.
> In either case, make sure you capture the steps in a bugzilla or some
> sort of 'issue-tracker' so if we need to revisit or recreate its
> covered.

We have in the past allowed binary blobs for bootstrapping. for instance fpc
needed fpc to build. So it would be ok. you would need to document how the
boot strapping works. so that it could be reproduced. Ideally with some
marcos and documentation in the spec so that if we add a new arch it can be
brought up quickly. Since i look after the buildsystem I think i can say
that its ok.

Dennis
_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list

On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 04:23:07PM +0100, Lubomir Kundrak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Would anyone be angry at me if I bootstrapped a package by encapsulating
> a binary rpm into srpm, importing it in CVS, building, and then
> rebuilding against itself?
>
> (The package in question is OpenJDK, which will be ready in a few days;
> hopefully one or two. It needs either itself or gcj 1.5.0 to build, and
> currently we only have gcj 1.4.2).

It is even in the guidelines:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-c23c2cd3782be842dc7ab40c35199c07cfbfe347

You should ask the FPC in theory.

--
Pat

_______________________________________________
epel-devel-list mailing list
epel-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list