mh->obr: can you comment this ?

This issue has been fixed on milestone m48. Please fetch:

sysui/desktop/suse/makefile.mk rev 1.3
sysui/desktop/redhat/makefile.mk rev 1.3
solenv/inc/packtools.mk rev 1.2

Closing. Feel free to re-open this issue if you still encouter the problem with
the file revisions mentioned above.

obr: reopening.

packtools.mk should IMO read:

RPM*=$(shell +-`which rpmbuild` && echo rpmbuild || echo rpm)

Right now, RPM is empty on my system with rpmbuild, because:

pavel@linux:~/.ooo/ooo_SRC680_m52_src/solenv/inc> which rpm
/bin/rpm
pavel@linux:~/.ooo/ooo_SRC680_m52_src/solenv/inc> which rpmbuild
/usr/bin/rpmbuild

Hi Pavel,

I see two problems with your proposal:

1.  To ensure backwards compatibility, Hamburg RE always uses RPM 3.x for
creating rpms. Prefering rpmbuild as you suggest will break this behaviour.

2. The RPM should be empty on non rpm based  systems.

Are you sure $(RPM) is empty on your system ? It should point to 'rpm', even
though I admit  this is probably not what you want it to be ..

obr: you're right. My approach doesn't work on non-rpm distributions. But it
should be simple to workaround.

BTW: Even with this change, I see:

rpmbuild: no spec file given

or similar. I do not have my system here right now.

What about:

RPM*=$(shell +-set i=`which rpm` && echo rpm`test -x /usr$${{i}}build && echo
build`)

Does this work for you (note the '/usr' prefix in the 'test' statement) ?

yes, it works. But I think we should rewrite the code like this (meta-makefile.mk):

RPM=`which rpmbuild`
RPM*=`which rpm`

(I hope I remember *= syntax right). Is this better? It is at least readable.

which seems to output the "* not found" message to stdout so the first line will
set RPM to garbish and the second gladly regard this as set  :-(

hjs: this was metacode. I haven't even tested it in real makefile.mk.

which on my system returns either full path to the binary or nothing. So I
thought that the first line would either set RPM to the full path of rpmbuild or
to be empty and in this case the second line would set it to path to rpm or
leave it empty again on systems without rpm.

what using configure instead?

Like epm does it:


checking for rpm... /bin/rpm
checking for rpmbuild... /usr/bin/rpmbuild

and suing set_soenv to export it to the environment?

Sounds reasonable to me. Let's move the rpm detecting code to
configure/set_soenv and our Hamburg RE equivalent. 

Created attachment 17750 [details]
create variable for RPM

NOtifying the configure man...

obr@pjanik: Please apply and test the patch. Thanks.

waratah:

This is unnecessary:

+dnl ===================================================================
+dnl Search all the common names for GNU make
+dnl ===================================================================

After patching and autoconf, generated env. file contains:

RPM="rpmbuild"

and it exports RPM variable and build works.

Hmm, shouldn't we rename the variable to RPMBUILD aka is there a possibility we
want to know the rpm package manager name (if there is any) in the future (think
of RPM and RPMBUILD variables)?

-> obr

The only reason I can think of the destinguish between rpm and rpmbuild in the
build process would be if rpmbuild would change it's command line interface.

Up to then I think a single variable is enough, otherwise one would have to code
the decision which variable to use into the different makefile.mk(s).

OK, should I fix that in my pj04 cws which I use for build issues of SRC680_m54?

Yes, please go ahead. Thanks.

Accept, will do that in some cws soon.

rodarvus: please take-over so we do not confilict while working on config_office
directory.

fix commited to cws configure4.

tested on fedora core 1, fedora core 2, SuSE 9.1 and Windows.

Seen in configure4

close