On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 11:50:23AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 14 June 2018 at 09:14, Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:55:21AM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > >> Then is there an easy way to port the specfile and tools to QEMU > >> repository so that we can pack that even with a git tree? > > > Well if we want to have a RPM spec file for QEMU distributed with upstream > > QEMU, then I think it would be better todo what libvirt does[2], and simply > > have the real Fedora specfile kept in QEMU git [3]. > > I would prefer not to. I think packaging is a job for downstream > distributors, and having our own (probably under-maintained) > version of the packaging infrastructure in upstream git just > makes things awkward for downstream, and requires us to make > choices about which distros we think "important" enough to > provide packaging for...
AFAIU that's not a problem; we can just provide more ways to package the system gradually, just like what Linux did: Kernel packaging: rpm-pkg - Build both source and binary RPM kernel packages binrpm-pkg - Build only the binary kernel RPM package deb-pkg - Build both source and binary deb kernel packages bindeb-pkg - Build only the binary kernel deb package snap-pkg - Build only the binary kernel snap package (will connect to external hosts) tar-pkg - Build the kernel as an uncompressed tarball targz-pkg - Build the kernel as a gzip compressed tarball tarbz2-pkg - Build the kernel as a bzip2 compressed tarball tarxz-pkg - Build the kernel as a xz compressed tarball But it seems that this package thing is not really that welcomed (and after all we have multiple specfiles here and there). Then I think I'll just live with it now. Regards, -- Peter Xu
