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.
David Cantrell
5 years ago
committed by
Nick Black