#61 Packaging octave draft for Octave packages
Closed: Fixed None Opened 10 years ago by orion.


  • Updated macros.octave - added notes and moved %{buildroot} into %octave_install_pkg. Attached here for reference.
  • Updated the draft to document the macros instead of listing them

Answers to questions:

  • octave-<pkg> packages will NOT be multi-lib.
  • I asked upstream about using %_libdir instead of %_libexecdir, not much traction. Seems easy to patch in, but I'm not sure we want to maintain a patch forever if upstream doesn't want it. They do put things under /usr/libexec with arch dependent names like "/usr/libexec/octave/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/plplot_octave.oct" so it does handle multi-lib.
  • renamed to %octave_pkg_preun
  • Removed TERM comments
  • Literal string "pkg", otherwise would use %{octpkg}

Octave draft passed (with changes to use %{_libdir} instead of %{_libexecdir}) (+1:8, 0:0, -1:0)

Please note that we understand that this means that you will need to patch octave for this, but we feel that it is important that Octave not pointlessly misuse %{_libexecdir}. Please let me know when you have a patched version of Octave so we can update the draft before publication and announcement.

Okay, patch committed to octave-3.4.0-5.fc15 and an update has been submitted:

https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/octave-3.4.0-5.fc15

Also updated the packaging draft.

Announcement text:

A new set of guidelines have been written for packaging Octave packages:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Octave

Metadata Update from @orion:
- Issue assigned to spot

4 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata