[Sugar-devel] A query regarding building "sugar-artwork" rpm.

Peter Robinson pbrobinson at gmail.com
Thu Aug 16 07:31:32 EDT 2012


On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I have been wanting to build some rpms for Sugar-on-F17 , after applying the
> "multi-select" patches.
> Regarding this, I have been able to build the "sugar" and "sugar-toolkit"
> rpms, after applying the patches.
>
> Thanks a ton to Manuel Quiñones, who helped me in figuring out how to do
> this; I was completely blank otherwise :P
>
>
>
> But, I am stuck at the "sugar-artwork" rpm.
> Following is the approach I followed ::
>
>
> a)
> Downloaded
> http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/sugar-artwork/0.96.5/1.fc17/src/sugar-artwork-0.96.5-1.fc17.src.rpm
> (same step as for "sugar" and "sugar-toolkit").
>
>
> b)
> "rpm -ivh  sugar-artwork-0.96.5-1.fc17.src.rpm"
> (same step as for "sugar" and "sugar-toolkit").
>
>
> c)
> Added the patch-info to "~/rpmbuild/SPECS/sugar-artwork.spec"
> (same step as for "sugar" and "sugar-toolkit").
>
>
> d)
> Copied the patch to "~/rpmbuild/SOURCES"
> (same step as for "sugar" and "sugar-toolkit").
>
>
> e)
> Built the rpm. It was successful.
> (same step as for "sugar" and "sugar-toolkit").
>
>
> f)
> However, when I apply the rpm via "sudo rpm --force --upgrade", it seems to
> succeed; however no newly-expected files are seen.
> (HOWEVER, THINGS WORKED FINE FOR "sugar" AND "sugar-toolkit").
>
>
>
> I can't seem to figure out the source of error; as all steps (except the
> last, f.), seem to work as expected.
> For brevity, I am attaching the sugar-artwork patch.
>
>
> I will be grateful for any information, as to what I may be doing wrong.

Could you provide a diff to the spec file from the original base one?
It's hard to tell what your doing wrong if I can't see what you're
doing.

I also suggest you modify the Release variable to distinguish between
the original and the one you build, it will make it easier for you and
you don't need to do a --force then.

Peter


More information about the Sugar-devel mailing list