News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Creating signed GitHub releases. Parent comment

Re:Creating signed GitHub releases by embik on Thursday April 14, 2016 @07:26AM (#11495705)
It's not only the name of the tarball after downloading it. RPM SPEC files require me to pass a full URL to the tarball's upstream source[1]:

> Source0: The full URL for the compressed archive containing the (original) pristine source code, as upstream released it. "Source" is synonymous with "Source0". If you give a full URL (and you should), its basename will be used when looking in the SOURCES directory.

But the only URL that is available is <Project URL>/archive/v0.1.1.tar.gz. The SPEC file is therefore defining a file named v0.1.1.tar.gz although I downloaded my tarball as foo-0.1.1.tar.gz. The packaging process looks for v0.1.1.tar.gz, fails to find it in my SOURCES directory and aborts.

I'm not blaming GitHub here in any way, I just wish I had a bit more flexibility for the tarball URL. Would be neat.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Creating signed GitHub releases by twr on Thursday April 14, 2016 @06:11PM (#11500734)
Specify

  https://github.com/username/repo/archive/v0.1.1/foo-0.1.1.tar.gz
for the URL.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Creating signed GitHub releases by embik on Friday April 15, 2016 @04:12AM (#11502898)
My god, that's the solution to my problem. Thank you very much. I did not realize that url was available.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Creating signed GitHub releases by Xylakant on Thursday April 14, 2016 @11:58AM (#11497758)
I recommend using some tooling that wraps the original rpm tooling, such as fpm or fpm-cookery. It does a fair job of covering up the worst warts.
[ Parent | on HN ]