You cannot select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
notcurses/tools/notcurses.spec

135 lines
4.0 KiB
Plaintext

Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
Name: notcurses
5 years ago
Version: 1.2.7
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: Character graphics and TUI library
License: ASL 2.0
URL: https://nick-black.com/dankwiki/index.php/Notcurses
Source0: https://github.com/dankamongmen/%{name}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz
Source1: https://github.com/dankamongmen/%{name}/releases/download/v%{version}/v%{version}.tar.gz.asc
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
Source2: https://dank.qemfd.net/dankamongmen.gpg
BuildRequires: gnupg2
BuildRequires: cmake
BuildRequires: gcc-c++
BuildRequires: pandoc
BuildRequires: python3-devel
BuildRequires: pkgconfig(ncurses)
%description
notcurses facilitates the creation of modern TUI programs,
making full use of Unicode and 24-bit TrueColor. It presents
an API similar to that of Curses, and rides atop Terminfo.
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
%package devel
Summary: Development files for the notcurses library
License: ASL 2.0
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
%description devel
This package contains the development files for the notcurses
library.
%package static
Summary: Static library for the notcurses library
License: ASL 2.0
Requires: %{name}-devel = %{version}-%{release}
%description static
The notcurses-static package includes the static notcurses library.
%prep
%{gpgverify} --keyring='%{SOURCE2}' --signature='%{SOURCE1}' --data='%{SOURCE0}'
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
%autosetup
%build
%cmake -DUSE_FFMPEG=off -DUSE_TESTS=off .
%make_build
%install
%make_install
%files
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
%doc CHANGELOG.md README.md
%license COPYRIGHT LICENSE
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses.so.%{version}
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses.so.1
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses++.so.1
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses++.so.%{version}
%files devel
%{_bindir}/notcurses-demo
%{_bindir}/notcurses-input
%{_bindir}/notcurses-ncreel
%{_bindir}/notcurses-pydemo
%{_bindir}/notcurses-tetris
%{_includedir}/notcurses/nckeys.h
%{_includedir}/notcurses/notcurses.h
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Cell.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/CellStyle.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Direct.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Menu.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/MultiSelector.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/NCAlign.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/NCBox.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/NCKey.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/NCLogLevel.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/NCScale.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/NotCurses.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Palette256.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Plane.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Plot.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Reel.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Root.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Selector.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Tablet.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/TabletCallback.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/Visual.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/_exceptions.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/_flag_enum_operator_helpers.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/_helpers.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/internal
%{_includedir}/ncpp/internal/Helpers.hh
%{_includedir}/ncpp/ncpp.hh
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses.so
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses++.so
%{_libdir}/cmake/notcurses
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/notcurses.pc
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/notcurses++.pc
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-demo.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-input.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-ncreel.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-pydemo.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-tester.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-tetris.1.gz
Change notcurses.spec to follow Fedora Packaging Policy More or less. Here's a list of things I changed: * Single line BuildRequires which is more of a convention than a requirement. * Drop make from BuildRequires. That's one we do actually provide. * Use pkgconfig(ncurses) to get the ncurses-devel BuildRequires. * Add a 'devel' subject and move development files there. * Add a 'static' package for the .a libraries which is common for other packages that provide static libraries. * Add doc files using %doc * -DUSE_TEST=off -> -DUSE_TESTS=off * Use %autosetup in %setup which covers adding patches in the future for downstream packaging. * Use path macros in %files * Correct the date format in the %changelog entry * Use the 1.2.6 release as an example Things that could use more consideration: * The release artifacts don't match what GitHub provides. Their automated download link gives you notcurses-1.2.6.tar.gz but the URL calls it v1.2.6.tar.gz. * There is no signature file uploaded. * notcurses-tester and notcurses-viewer do not build. * Should the demo programs go in the main package or devel. I felt devel was more appropriate. * Should the packaging be further refined to split out the C++ runtime and static libraries to separate subpackages? I did some local test runs using mock. I ran the SRPM through rpmlint which would happen when the package is submitted for inclusion. For the download archive and signature, I create new release posts on my github projects and create a separate tarball and sign that and upload them there. It is separate from the GitHub automated make-me-a-tarball download link. That might be what you're planning on doing.
5 years ago
%{_mandir}/man1/notcurses-view.1.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_cell.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_channels.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_directmode.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_fade.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_init.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_input.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_lines.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_menu.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_multiselector.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_ncplane.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_ncvisual.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_output.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_palette.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_plot.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_reel.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_refresh.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_render.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_selector.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_stats.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_stdplane.3.gz
%{_mandir}/man3/notcurses_stop.3.gz
%files static
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses.a
%{_libdir}/libnotcurses++.a
%changelog
5 years ago
* Tue Apr 07 2020 Nick Black <dankamongmen@gmail.com> - 1.2.7-1
- Initial Fedora packaging