[git-buildpackage] git-mock [was: Re: Bug#771215: git-buildpackage: please merge support for gbp pq-rpm]

[Guido Günther]

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:16:37AM +0100, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 02:27:51PM +0100, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 01:22:27PM +0100, Guido Günther wrote:
> > 
> > > ======================================================================
> > > ERROR: test suite for <class 'tests.component.rpm.test_pq_rpm.TestPqRpm'>
> > 
> > Speaking of tests, I think that the following should also be included in
> > the branch (unless I missed it elsewhere):
> > 
> >   http://git.tzafrir.org.il/cgit/git-buildpackage.git/commit/?id=b2d8fa3bdb750ddf974cb605de4e5f0c9b4281cb
> > 
> > That repo also has a brute-force rebase of buildpackage-rpm on top of
> > 0.6.22 (just that command. Others are still missing).
> 
> On top of that I now have an initial version of --git-mock - using mock
> as a chroot builder for rpm packages. I basically copied the way
> pbuilder is used (created a separate git-mock and used it as a builder).
> Mock is already installed by default with its own permission elavtion
> handler.
> 
> http://git.tzafrir.org.il/cgit/git-buildpackage.git/commit/?h=buildpackage-rpm&id=03e38ad87c882d62ce9f54709fcf8c535edc36fa
> 
> (I finally have clone URLs listed, but this is a single commit)
> 
> Basic usage:
> 
>   gbp buildpackage-rpm --git-mock --git-dist=epel-6
> 
> Some notes:
> * It runs mock twice. Once for generating the srpm and once for
>   generating the package from that. This is because some packages have
>   platform-dependent macros that may be expanded at srpm-build time.
> 
>   Avoiding that and using rpmbuild directly would have been faster.
> 
> * I currently (for the sake of simplicity) avoid interpreting any
>   define-s sent in the command line and just assume the spec will be in
>   ./SPECS, sources in ./SOURCES, place the SRPM under ./SRPMS (I
>   consider it temporary).
> 
> * I don't have a good default for the resulting files. Currently I place
>    the results under ./results/<dist>/<arch>
> 
> What do you think?

I've cleaned up the patch a little and applied it to current git. I
think assuming that the above directory layout is fine.

Avoiding a full build for the SRPM would be nice though, did you make
any progress on that one?

Cheers,
 -- Guido