RPM Packages - 2025 ( For OS/2 Software in General)

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello

I modified DataSeeker based in the suggestions. And I also wanted to go deep on the icons creations.

But I'm not sure if I made it the optimal way to create the readme and copying icons.

DATASEEK_READ:WPProgram|Read Me|<DATASEEK_FOLDER>|EXENAME=e.exe;PROGTYPE=PROG_PM;PARAMETERS=((%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-%{version}/DataSeek.txt));OPEN=RUNNING

DATASEEK_LIC:WPProgram|License|<DATASEEK_FOLDER>|EXENAME=e.exe;PROGTYPE=PROG_PM;PARAMETERS=((%{_datadir}/licenses/%{name}-%{version}/COPYING));OPEN=RUNNING

Any suggestion are welcome?

Regards


Note: I reuploaded the files with some changes.

[Martin Iturbide]

Here I'm trying mp3gain.

No icon creation is done or needed, i think.
I guess this port is "pentium4"

Regards

[Martin Iturbide]

And the next one AACGAIN.

[Martin Iturbide]

Here goes cdda2wav

[Dave Yeo]

Have you looked at the build flags before deciding that all the above are P4? And does the license require source?

[Martin Iturbide]

Hi Dave

Some came with source code and some don't. Where should I put the source code in the FHS?
Should the source code be unziped there, or just like a zip file?

Regards

[Dave Yeo]

The usual is to have a source RPM which is built while building the package. If the source is in a stable place, simply putting a link to the source should be good enough.

[Remy]

Hi Dave

Some came with source code and some don't. Where should I put the source code in the FHS?
Should the source code be unziped there, or just like a zip file?

Regards

If you have the source code (e.g. as archive file) i think that you can put it under :
(something I do when using @unixroot)
all .zip;.tar;.wpi   to   /usr/src/<name of package>

[Martin Iturbide]

Hi Dave

Some came with source code and some don't. Where should I put the source code in the FHS?
Should the source code be unziped there, or just like a zip file?

Regards

If you have the source code (e.g. as archive file) i think that you can put it under :
(something I do when using @unixroot)
all .zip;.tar;.wpi   to   /usr/src/<name of package>

Thanks. I will try later if "%{_usrsrc}" works for us.

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello

Just a question here about cdda2wav.exe, (it is compiled on 2007-08-24), it references to libc05.dll (which is included). Do you think it will be desirable to recompile it to reference the libc that is included in ArcaOS ?

cdda2wav is included in cdrtools, right?
- https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdrtools/

Regards

[Dave Yeo]

Ideal would be recompiling it if easy, cdrecord used a weird build system that only supported EMX.
Another idea is to package libc05 separately and have a dependency.

[Remy]

Hello

Just a question here about cdda2wav.exe, (it is compiled on 2007-08-24), it references to libc05.dll (which is included). Do you think it will be desirable to recompile it to reference the libc that is included in ArcaOS ?

cdda2wav is included in cdrtools, right?
- https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdrtools/

Regards

Hi Martin,

ArcaOS 5.1.1 has cdrtools 3.01.1 package installed (RPM) but no cdd2wav.exe into it while cdda2wav is available into a different cdrtools build and can be used as standalone installation
Having cdda2wav available as a standalone RPM installation package is then the best option.   

Note: If you are going to recompile it, I'm ok to give it a test, using cdda2wav.exe under AVxCAT

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello

Do you think it will be good to do an extra things to the executables? I noticed that a lot of the .exe and .dll does not has bldlevel information.
- Will be it be ok to add that information on the exe/dll using AddToFile ?
- would that violates the sacrosanctity of the binary ?
- or is it too much OCD ?

I know that it may only be a nice to have, but not completely necessary.

Regards

[Dave Yeo]

You understand that you have to rebuild the binaries after patching the makefiles to use Addtofile? Also I just noticed the license doesn't allow hosting the script on any servers so it would have to be downloaded by anyone rebuilding the binary.
Other then that, adding bldlevel info seems a good idea.

[Martin Iturbide]

Hi

You understand that you have to rebuild the binaries after patching the makefiles to use Addtofile? Also I just noticed the license doesn't allow hosting the script on any servers so it would have to be downloaded by anyone rebuilding the binary.
Other then that, adding bldlevel info seems a good idea.

I guess I didn't understand it right. I thought that "AddToFile" changed the .exe to include the bldlevel information, and that modified exe was going to be included on the RPM. I didn't know that the binary had to be rebuild. Or that every user had to download "AddToFile" for it to work.

Regards