Re: [Ltib] spec file for json-c-0.8

[Stuart Hughes]

On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 04:54 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, Stuart Hughes wrote:
> 
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > Looks good to me.  It just needs entries for Packager, Group and URL.
> >
> > Regards, Stuart
> >
> > On Sat, 2009-01-10 at 15:07 -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > >    i'm open to comments on the following spec file for json-c-0.8 -- i
> > > lashed it together based on the existing one for json-c-0.7 that
> > > already existed in our local pool.  the patch is strictly for
> > > increasing some of the macro values, it's not in any way required.
> > > thoughts?
> > >
> > >
> > > %define pfx /opt/freescale/rootfs/%{_target_cpu}
> > >
> > > Summary         : JSON C Parser
> > > Name            : json-c
> > > Version         : 0.8
> > > Release         : 0
> > > License         : GPL
> > > Vendor          : Freescale
> > > Packager        : xxxx
> > > Group           : xxxx
> > > URL             : http://xxxx
> > > Source          : %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> > > Patch1          : json-c-0.8-extended_memory.patch
> > > BuildRoot       : %{_tmppath}/%{name}
> > > Prefix          : %{pfx}
> > >
> > > %Description
> > > %{summary}
> > >
> > > %Prep
> > > %setup
> > > %patch1 -p1
> > >
> > > %Build
> > > ac_cv_func_malloc_0_nonnull='yes' \
> > > jm_cv_func_working_malloc='yes' \
> > > ac_cv_func_realloc_0_nonnull='yes' \
> > > jm_cv_func_working_realloc='yes' \
> > > ./configure --prefix=%{_prefix} --host=$CFGHOST --build=%{_build}
> > > make
> > >
> > > %Install
> > > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> > > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{pfx}
> > >
> > > %Clean
> > > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> > >
> > > %Files
> > > %defattr(-,root,root)
> > > %{pfx}/*
> 
>   ok, i can do that shortly.  in the interests of full disclosure, i'm
> not clear on the necessity for the malloc- and realloc- related
> content in the %Build section, but i'm just basing this on what's been
> a working json-c-0.7 build that's been used here for a while.  and
> i'll remove the reference to the patch since all that represented was
> bumping up some values for stack depth and so on that was purely
> local.
> 
>   what "Group" would that belong to, or i'll just submit it and you
> can fill it in?
> 

The group needs to be something from /usr/share/doc/rpm-xxxx/GROUPS:

Amusements/Games
Amusements/Graphics
Applications/Archiving
Applications/Communications
Applications/Databases
Applications/Editors
Applications/Emulators
Applications/Engineering
Applications/File
Applications/Internet
Applications/Multimedia
Applications/Productivity
Applications/Publishing
Applications/System
Applications/Text
Development/Debuggers
Development/Languages
Development/Libraries
Development/System
Development/Tools
Documentation
System Environment/Base
System Environment/Daemons
System Environment/Kernel
System Environment/Libraries
System Environment/Shells
User Interface/Desktops
User Interface/X
User Interface/X Hardware Support

Regards, Stuart