Is there a way to prevent the rpmbuild command from reading the ~/.rpmmacros file? I want to add rpmbuild to a Make target and want to get a consistent build under any user account, regardless of the options somebody might have personally set in the rpmmacros file in his home directory.
How can I do this? Or, is that actually a bad idea?
If you're looking to get the a consistent build then the rpmmacros is only one part of the problem. The build may still differ simply because it's running on a machine with different things installed. Use mock to get a truly consistent build environment.
Solved this now this by setting $HOME to an empty directory while running rpmbuild:
mkdir $MY_DIST_DIR/dummyhome
HOME=$MY_DIST_DIR/dummyhome/ rpmbuild ...
rm -r $MY_DIST_DIR/dummyhome
Related
Steps:
Installed coverity
Configured compiler
cov-configure --javascript
cov-configure --cs
I am stuck at the build step of cov-build. Yarn is used to run and configure the service. But I am not sure what coverity wants here.
I tried a couple of npm run commands, every time end up getting this:
[WARNING] No files were emitted. This may be due to a problem with your configuration
or because no files were actually compiled by your build command.
Please make sure you have configured the compilers actually used in the compilation.
I also tried different compilers, but no luck.
What should be done in this case?
You need to do a file system capture for Javascript files. You can accomplish this by running cov-build with the --no-command flag.
cov-build --dir CoverityIntermedediateDir --no-command --fs-capture-list list.txt
Lets break down these commands:
--dir: intermediate directory to store the emitted results (used for cov-analyze later).
--no-command: Do not run a build command and to look for certain file types
--fs-capture-list: Use the file that is provided to specify which files to look at and possibly emit to the intermediate directory.
A recommended way to generate the list.txt file is to grab it from your source control. If using git run:
git ls-files > list.txt
I want to also point out that if you don't have a convenient way to get a file listing in order to use the --fs-capture-list command you can use --fs-capture-search command and pair that with a filter to exclude the node_modules directory.
The coverity forums have some useful questions and answers:
Node.js File system capture
Really, the best place to look is at the documentation. There are several examples of what you want to do in their guides.
Created a simple debian/ubuntu package with some library files (*.so).
Works fine except, it installs them as default in the root path "/".
Since I've recreated my Makefile to output to $DESTDIR/ instead of "the usual" directory that I provide in the Makefile, when compiling from source, how do I now set the path of where the files should be installed now? I know there are several choices when using dh_make to create the package, "s" being the default one. Still, can't seem to find anything on where to tell dpkg to put the installed files.
Secondly, a Deb Library package containing only ".so" files should still be a "Single binary" since I gather that using the Library is for development purposes? Since this is a library, I just wanna make sure that's not the cause of the files being installed in the wrong location. What I mean is .so files and header files installation?
What I've used:
dh_make -e my#email.com -f ../myfile-1.0.tar.gz
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot
and some configurations set i debian/control, $DESTDIR in Makefile.
Seems that it was fairly simple, yet very confusing. This works, not sure if there is a better solution.
In my makefile I have a few variables
InstallTo = /usr/lib
install:
mkdir -p $(DESTDIR)$(InstallTo)
cp $FILE_TO_COPY $(DESTDIR)$(InstallTo)
This way it will create the directory tree inside the *.deb file. I had some trouble using /usr/local/lib instead of /usr/lib/ and rmdir complained when trying to delete it and it had no files (just directories). Not sure why, but changed it to /usr/lib instead.
Since someone voted this up, I'm guessing someone were also looking for the answer and this is my solution. Perhaps someone can provide a better one if there is one.
Just a note, $DESTDIR variable is the variable that dh_make suggest the user to use in our Makefile. It's the path to where dpkg will build the program and where it will install it so it can be included in the .deb file.
I have a debian package that I built that contains a tar ball of the files, a control file, and a postinst file. Its built using dpkg-deb and it installs properly using dpkg.
The modification I would like to make is to have the installation directory of the files be determined at runtime based on an environment variable that will be set when dpkg -i is run on the deb file. I echo out the environment variable in the postinst script and I can see that its set properly.
My questions:
1) Is it possible to dynamically determine the installation directory at runtime?
2) If its possible how would I go about this? I have read about the rules file and the mypackage.install files but I don't know if either of these would allow me to accomplish this.
I could hack it by copying the files to the target location in the posinst script but I would prefer to do it the right way if possible.
Thanks in advance!
So this is what I found out about this problem over the past couple of weeks.
With prepackaged binaries you can't build a debian package with a destination directory dynamicall determined at runtime. I believe that this might be possible if installing a package that is built from source where you can set the install directory using configure. But in this case since these are embedded Ubuntu machines they don't have make so I didn't pursue such an option. I did work out a non traditional method (hack) for installing that did work. Since debian packages simply contain a tar ball relative to / simply build your package relative to a directory under /tmp. In the postinst script you can then determine where to copy the files from the archive into a permanent location.
I expected that after rebooting and the automatic deletion of the subdirectory under /tmp that dpkg might not know that the file package existed. This wasn't a problem. When I ran 'dpkg -l myapp' it showed as still installed. Updating the package using dpkg/apt-get also worked without a hitch.
What I did find is that if you attempted to remove the package using 'dpkg -r myapp' that dpkg would try and remove /tmp which wasn't good. However /tmp isn't easily removed so it never succeeded. Plus in our situation we never remove packages but instead simply upgrade them.
I eventually had to abandon the universal package due to code differences in the sources resulting in having to recompile per platform but I would have left it this way and it did work.
I tried using --instdir to change the install directory of the package and it does relocate the files but dpkg fails since the dpkg file can't be found relative to the new instdir. Using --instdir is sort of like a chroot. I also tried --admindir and --root in various combinations to see if I could use the dpkg system relative to / but install relocate the files but they didn't work. I guess rpm has a relocate option that works but not Ubuntu.
You can also write a script that runs dpkg-deb with a different environment for 6 times, generating 6 different packages. When you make a modification, you simply have to run your script, and all 6 packages gets generated and you can install them on your machines avoiding postinst hacking!
Why not install to a standard location, and simply use a postinst script to create symbolic links to the desired location? This is much cleaner, and shouldn't break anything in dpk -I.
I made a perl script that creates a deb binary package from scratch.
I created the data, control, etc.
But when I run dpkg -i on my deb package it complains that it is unable to files from data.
Example:
unable to create '.dpkg-new'(while processing ''): No such file or directory.
I have downloaded some .deb packages to look at and they do not use the preinst script to create the directory structure.
I am thinking I am doing something wrong, I consider having to create my own directories in preinst but it does not seem right... perhaps I am missing something?
Do I have to create directories where my files from data will be copied in the preinst sh, or should dpkg do it and I am doing something wrong?
I had the same problem in a Ruby script I wrote.
I was generating a list of files to pass to tar when building the data.tar.gz archive. When I ungzip and untared the archive manually it would deflate fine, but dpkg would fail.
It turns out that the list of files must also include each directory to create as well.
Note that when I created data.tar.gz I built it with nearly the same options as dpkg-deb/build.c does in the dpkg-1.15.8.11 source.
execlp(TAR, "tar", "-cf", "-", "--format=gnu", "--null", "-T", "-", "--no-recursion", NULL);
Instead I used
IO.popen("gnutar -czf - --format=gnu -T - --no-recursion", "r+")
In addition to what #Arrowmaster said, check the http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ for some detailed explanation of the files. After you build the package itself, you can check it with lintian tool to see if there is anything obvious you might have missed.
If any one looks for a solution to the problem:
"Build a deb package from an rpm spec file."
Look here http://www.deepnet.cx/debbuild/
I have made my own perl build script much simple then the mentioned one so I can easily maintain it.
Some useful knowledge gained in the process:
0. the deb is an ar archive that contains 3 files, the order of the files is important.
1. the scripts from control.tar.gz must be made executable.
2. it is good to have a preinstall script to make directories if dirs do not exist.
3. sometimes dpkg decides to unzip your zips (this happened if the zip was the only file in the data.tar.gz) so check for that in an postinstall script.
4. when you tar.gz some files be sure to chmod to the dir that contains the directory structure for your tar.
You should not attempt to manually create a .deb binary package by hand. The Debian New Maintainers' Guide covers how to get started creating a Debian package using the correct tools.
Your hand created package may look correct to you but because it is not installing it is obviously flawed in either a minor way that you have not noticed or in a more serious way that is not visible to you (for example most people don't realize a .deb is actually an ar archive).
There are lots of reasons for this. You really need to run:
dpkg -i -D1110 mydeb.deb
And post the result to have any hope of someone being able to solve the problem.
I've written a C++ program (command line, portable code) and I'm trying to release a Linux version at the same time as the Windows version. I've written a makefile as follows:
ayane: *.cpp *.h
g++ -Wno-write-strings -oayane *.cpp
Straightforward enough so far; but I'm given to understand it's customary to have a second step, make install. So when I put the install: target in the makefile... what command should be associated with it? (If possible I'd prefer it to work on all Unix systems as well as Linux.)
Installation
A less trivial installer will copy several things into place, first insuring that the appropriate paths exists (using mkdir -p or similar). Typically something like this:
the executable goes in $INSTALL_PATH/bin
any libraries built for external consumption go in $INSTALL_PATH/lib or $INSTALL_PATH/lib/yourappname
man pages go in $INSTALL_PATH/share/man/man1 and possibly other sections if appropriate
other docs go in $INSTALL_PATH/share/yourappname
default configuration files go in $INSTALL_PATH/etc/yourappname
headers for other to link against go in $INSTALL_PATH/include/yourappname
Installation path
The INSTALL_PATH is an input to the build system, and usually defaults to /usr/local. This gives your user the flexibility to install under their $HOME without needing elevated permission.
In the simplest case just use
INSTALL_PATH?=/usr/local
at the top of the makefile. Then the user can override it by setting an environment variable in their shell.
Deinstallation
You also occasionally see make installs that build a manifest to help with de-installation. The manifest can even be written as a script to do the work.
Another approach is just to have a make uninstall that looks for the things make install places, and removes them if they exist.
In the simplest case you just copy the newly created executable into the /usr/local/bin path. Of course, it's usually more complicated than that.
Notice that most of these operations require special rights, which is why make install is usually invoked using sudo.
make install is usually the step that "installs" the binary into the correct place.
For example, when compiling Vim, make install may place it in /usr/local/bin
Not all Makefiles have a make install