[CentOS] spec file frustration (rant)

Wed Dec 14 00:14:20 UTC 2016
Alice Wonder <alice at domblogger.net>

On 12/13/2016 03:57 PM, Phil Wyett wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 15:39 -0800, Alice Wonder wrote:
>> On 12/13/2016 03:34 PM, Phil Wyett wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 14:16 -0800, Alice Wonder wrote:
>>>> I'm getting spec files from centos git which is really convenient when
>>>> the related source is easy to find. But some things - e.g. from a spec file
>>>> # How to create the source tarball:
>>>> #
>>>> # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/git/python-rhsm.git/
>>>> # cd client/python-rhsm
>>>> # tito build --tag python-rhsm-$VERSION-$RELEASE --tgz
>>>> Never used tito before, so I install it and try, and rather than giving
>>>> me the source package I need - it gives me a python traceback
>>>> complaining that I haven't configured some things properly.
>>>> Seems a lot of the software distribution world is getting overly complex
>>>> with an expectation that the end user who needs to exercise his FLOSS
>>>> rights has to use git or nodejs or for php composer or whatever just to
>>>> get what use to be available with no more complexity than choosing
>>>> tar.gz or tar.bz2 or .zip if the dev was Windows.
>>>> Whatever happened to KISS and why can't source tarballs be distributed
>>>> as source tarballs?
>>>> Back when I was a Fedora packager - the packaging guidelines would
>>>> reject a package of the Source tarball wasn't a URL and if the timestamp
>>>> on the tarball in the src.rpm didn't match upstream even if the checksum
>>>> was identical.
>>>> Guess those days are gone.
>>>> /rant
>>> Hi,
>>> Not seen this one before, but don't play with much python. The SPEC
>>> really should just refer too a URL too a compressed archive as the
>>> packages home site supplies them.
>>> https://github.com/candlepin/python-rhsm/releases
>>> Regards
>>> Phil
>> I went to the github and it doesn't have a packaged release that matches
>> the version. I managed to find it in the build system logs, but its just
>> weird.
>> If I recall, formerly for a tarball to be different than what was on
>> upstream, it had to have a legal reason (e.g. patents) and a script in
>> the sources that could turn upstream tarball into the version used.
> Hi,
> Out of interest, which version do you refer to?
> Regards
> Phil

1.17.9 is the version in CentOS 7.3 and what I needed (and found on a 
build server)