[CentOS-devel] a public build tool for seven
larry.brigman at gmail.com
Thu Dec 26 20:37:40 UTC 2013
Is there a mock config that can be used by others yet?
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote:
> On 12/22/2013 02:11 AM, Steven Crothers wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Lamar Owen <lowen at pari.edu> wrote:
> >> While on the surface it sounds like a good idea, the fact of the
> >> matter is that CentOS rebuilds from already built source RPMS. This
> >> is not the normal use case for Koji, where sources, patches, and
> >> specs are its input.
> > I don't believe that is true, releasing Red Hat built binaries would
> > be directly against the Red Hat licensing agreement.
> Binaries? Where did I mention binary RPMS? Source RPMS == SRPMS,
> right? The source RPM (SRPM) is spit out from the same build process
> that makes the binary RPM (thus, why I called them 'already built').
> The input to building RPMS is in SOURCES and SPECS in the build tree;
> SRPMS are not the input, they are part of the output of the process and
> encapsulate the input to the process in a convenient and rebuildable
> wrapper that also holds some essential build information that is not
> found in the normal SOURCES and SPECS input.
> > C6 is/should be built from SRPMs, Johnny builds each package in his
> The environment used is the one built up by mock in the buildroot;
> sometimes some customizations have to be added to make this work
> (hand-injecting buildrequires, as Johnny mentioned, is part of the
> process; there are ways to automate 'hand' injection without modifying
> the source RPM (SRPM, if you prefer)). I've done this myself,
> rebuilding CentOS 5 on IA64, and it was educational.
> Koji is built to best handle the case for building from SOURCES and
> SPECS (which are in a revision control system, ideally), not from
> already built source RPMS (SRPMS). It will rebuild from SRPM, but it's
> overkill for that use case.
> Again, I say that from first-hand experience in actually doing a
> rebuild, this isn't speculation on my part here. Go back and read the
> archives; I was one who, until actually trying it, thought koji might be
> a good thing (it's in the archives, as I already said). I had to have
> it proven to me, and I proved it to myself that koji is overkill for
> this purpose.
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CentOS-devel