There should be a way to just one directory (non-recursively)

jordansissel / fpm

Effing package management! Build packages for multiple platforms (deb, rpm, etc) with great ease and sanity.

http://fpm.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

Other

11.16k stars 1.07k forks source link

There should be a way to just one directory (non-recursively) #1387

Open jcbollinger opened 7 years ago

jcbollinger commented 7 years ago

The --directories option of FPM 1.8.1 is an unwantedly blunt instrument, at least for building RPM targets from directory sources. When attempting to build multiple RPMs whose installed images share a directory tree, one cannot name the top-level directory as the source, for that would include the whole tree in the package. One wants that directory to be owned by at least one of the packages, however, and the --directories option seems the only documented means for achieving that, short of intervening to edit a spec file. But the --directories option also makes the package own all the other directories in the subtree, which one does not want in this scenario.

jordansissel commented 7 years ago

@jcbollinger this behavior seems not good. Here's what I have tested right now, and I'm not reproducing your issue:

Scenario:

/foo/bar/app1
/foo/bar/app2

FPM:

fpm -s dir -t rpm -n app1 --directories /opt/foo/bar/app1 foo/bar/app1=/opt/foo/bar/app1
fpm -s dir -t rpm -n app2 --directories /opt/foo/bar/app2 foo/bar/app2=/opt/foo/bar/app2

Who owns what?

% rpm -qlp app1-1.0-1.x86_64.rpm
/opt/foo/bar/app1
/opt/foo/bar/app1/app1

% rpm -qlp app2-1.0-1.x86_64.rpm
/opt/foo/bar/app2
/opt/foo/bar/app2/app2

Installing these:

% sudo rpm -i app1-1.0-1.x86_64.rpm app2-1.0-1.x86_64.rpm
% rpm -ql app1
/opt/foo/bar/app1
/opt/foo/bar/app1/app1
% rpm -ql app2
/opt/foo/bar/app2
/opt/foo/bar/app2/app2

Each package only owns what was specified in fpm command.

This was tested on Fedora 25.

jordansissel commented 7 years ago

Can you show me an example of what you are doing? I agree, btw, fpm+rpm's handling of directories is really frustrating, and I'd like to improve it if we can.

jcbollinger commented 7 years ago

Apparently, no, I cannot show you an example. I'm not sure what made me think FPM was exhibiting this behavior. Please forgive me for wasting your time with this one.

jordansissel commented 7 years ago

Wasn't a waste of time - it's good to ask for extra eyes on a problem! The directory behavior of fpm+rpm has always been a bit confusing.

No worries :)