On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
> Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote on Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 08:06:33 -0500:
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> > Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote on Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 21:17:11 -0500:
>> >> I've gone ahead and updated, and casually tested, my published RHEL 6
>> >> compatible RPM building tools with a new 1.8.5 tag at:
>> >> https://github.com/nkadel/subversion-1.8.x-srpm/tree/1.8.5-0.1
>> > Perhaps these should be linked to from http://subversion.apache.org/packages?
>> I'd welcome that.
> Well, go ahead and post a patch against the site source. (You're the
> best person to write the prose description.)
They're in github as well. I should probably add these comments to the
patches, but not tonight.
Updated version of get-deps.sh, with with consistent
syntax, latest dependencies, and selection of new sqlite-autoconf
package instead of sqlite-amalgamation.
Old RHEL/Fedora patch, set KDE configuration
directories correctly for RHEL
Old RHEL/Fedora patch to use "-pie" for compiled binaries.
RHEL/Fedora patch to set KDE options corectly for kwallete.
RPM building patch to set up symlinks for svnmucc,
when "DESTDIR" for RPM building doe snot match installation directory.
Ose only for RPM building.
There are other configuration files specifially for building RPM's,
such as the "subversion.conf" for configuring an Apache server for
mod_dav_svn, and an svnserve.conf for snvserver setups, and "psvn.el"
and "psvn-init.el" from a third party for setting up Emacs in more
detail for Subversion.
>> They don't contain binary RPM's, partly because I'm
>> not in a good position to run a secure binary repository with GPG keys
>> and fully controlled build environments.
> FWIW, the ASF Infra folks are looking into ways to implement secure
> signed binary builds for other projects. This is something that the
> project as a whole could sign up to, not individual contributors or
I'm interested: I've not gotten far lately with repoforge (which seems
to have gone idle) or getting past the initial setup for Fedora and
EPEL. And I'm afraid that EPEL woul dnever include subversion-1.7.x or
subverison-1.8.x, because it would be an irreversible client format
update from their current subversion-1.6.x.
> If there is interest, now is the best time to talk to infra about it,
> while the solution is still being designed.
>> But they're very useful RPM
>> building toolkits for developers, and I've sent notes to RHEL and
>> Fedora about issues I've found.. I've also submitted them to Repoforge
>> in the past: looks like time to update those rquests.
Received on 2013-11-28 02:09:58 CET