Packaging tutorial's approach of packaging GNU Hello has suffered from certain complexities in GNU Hello package. The package is quite old and uses some tooling from the GNU project that are not very widely used any more, such as Texinfo. Also, the package is old and thus suffers from e.g. having a file that is not UTF-8 encoded. To avoid immediately exposing tutorial readers to these quirks, make GNU Hello part 2 of the tutorial and add a simpler package, Banner, as part 1. This way the reader can reach a complete specfile, compliant with Fedora guidelines, quicker, and still get a feeling for resolving packaging quirks in the second part.
In the future, basing the first tutorial on real packages should probably be switched to hosting dedicated "test project", which avoids any quirks and can be packaged to Fedora requirements using only Fedora's set of RPM macros. Such package should also avoid GNU Autotools and be based on CMake or Meson, which are simpler to understand and more widespread today.
Packaging tutorial's approach of packaging GNU Hello has suffered from certain complexities in GNU Hello package. The package is quite old and uses some tooling from the GNU project that are not very widely used any more, such as Texinfo. Also, the package is old and thus suffers from e.g. having a file that is not UTF-8 encoded. To avoid immediately exposing tutorial readers to these quirks, make GNU Hello part 2 of the tutorial and add a simpler package, Banner, as part 1. This way the reader can reach a complete specfile, compliant with Fedora guidelines, quicker, and still get a feeling for resolving packaging quirks in the second part.
In the future, basing the first tutorial on real packages should probably be switched to hosting dedicated "test project", which avoids any quirks and can be packaged to Fedora requirements using only Fedora's set of RPM macros. Such package should also avoid GNU Autotools and be based on CMake or Meson, which are simpler to understand and more widespread today.