Packaging for RPM about nohang

[tim77]

@tim77 What about CentOS 8?

Packaged.

[hakavlad]

@tim77 psi-monitor has been improved, see https://imgur.com/a/ENYTBYd

Please upgrade pkg

[hakavlad]

Maybe because i build from latest git snapshot, not release?

v0.1 doesn't have version file, but v0.2 will have it.

[hakavlad]

Thank you for the packages.

[tim77]

Done. BTW i am still waiting for someone to review my package and then i can push it in main repos...

[hakavlad]

@tim77 Please make a rebuild. The demon received an important update related to the acceleration of GUI notifications 05ae755

[hakavlad]

you released new, tagged version

OK, I want to tag, but

TODO: write a docs and else some fixes

[KAMiKAZOW]

v0.2 will have it.

Is there an ETA for that, btw? I want to get nohang into official openSUSE repositories and @tim77 does such great work on snapshot builds, I obviously want to base my work in his.

Packaging 0.1 seems antiquated after only a few months and using git snaphots is discouraged by openSUSE maintainers.

[hakavlad]

Is there an ETA for that, btw?

I hope to make a release this month.

[hakavlad]

I hope to make a release this year.

[hakavlad]

It's not empty if installed via git clone && make.

[tim77]

Maybe because i build from latest git snapshot, not release?

[hakavlad]

No. It does not matter.

	install -d $(DESTDIR)$(CONFDIR)/nohang
	-git describe --tags --long --dirty > version
        -install -m0644 version $(DESTDIR)$(CONFDIR)/nohang/version

https://github.com/hakavlad/nohang/blob/master/Makefile

Maybe I should remake Makefile. But I don't know how.

[hakavlad]

There is no such problem with AUR https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/nohang-git/ package, version is not empty and --version works well.

[tim77]

I found what cause this:

git describe --tags --long --dirty > version
fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git

This because i downloaded sources via git API, not git clone. Cloning repo and any internet access during build process not allowed in Fedora. But we can easily fix this and add this ver info in spec file during build RPM.

[hakavlad]

Thank you. By the way, version on you package shows v0.1-4c1b5ee instead of v0.1-435-4c1b5ee.

[hakavlad]

BuildRequires:  systemd
%else
BuildRequires:  systemd-rpm-macros
%endif
Requires:       logrotate%{?_isa}
%if 0%{?fedora} || 0%{?rhel} >= 8
Recommends:     libnotify%%{?_isa}
%endif
%{?systemd_requires}

logrotate and libnotify are optdepends and not required by default. Systemd gives best expirience, but it is not depend/recommend.

[tim77]

Thank you. By the way, version on you package shows v0.1-4c1b5ee instead of v0.1-435-4c1b5ee.

Usually this enough. But if this critical go discuss this there and ask other maintainers how to do this better.

[tim77]

logrotate and libnotify are optdepends and not required by default. Systemd gives best expirience, but it is not depend/recommend.

OK we can made logrotate as optional dependency too and own this dirs by nohang as well i think.

[hakavlad]

@tim77 I'd like to see the next packages:

• nohang (only release versions, stable)
• nohang-devel (unstable, maybe with autobuild)
• nohang-desktop with config optimized for desktop, release versions

Is it possible?

[tim77]

I think this could be done easily: IMO best way to do this if you did two separate build in makefile (nohang and nohang-desktop) and this both version i split as sub packages in rpm spec file. And push this both version to main Fedora repos.

And we can automatize build process in COPR for nohang-devel

[hakavlad]

8dacba0 done

[hakavlad]

@tim77 Please make a rebuild.

[tim77]

Temp version here. We need to make things better there and automatize desktop case... :) WIP.

[hakavlad]

how can I install nohang-desktop?

[tim77]

sudo dnf install nohang-desktop -y

But you need manually replace or run nohang with desktop config file included into nohang-desktop package. We need to automatize this but better if we do this without %post scripts.

[hakavlad]

But you need manually replace

How to get it out of the box?

We need to automatize this but better if we do this without %post scripts.

How can we do this?

better if we do this without %post scripts

Why?

[hakavlad]

@tim77 Can I help you?

[tim77]

Yes, IMO together we can do better. :) Check again this post and go discuss this there where other maintainers can help us too.

[hakavlad]

@tim77 GUI notifications is broken, please make a rebuild.

Also nohang-desktop doesn't work (it uses non-desktop config).

[hakavlad]

@tim77 What about CentOS 8?

[tim77]

Also nohang-desktop doesn't work (it uses non-desktop config).

Yes, that was i what i talked about earlier. Easy to fix this via %post install scrips but we lose another useful feature by doing this - %config(noreplace). Definitely help wanted there, how to handle this better...

For now user need to manually replace config file with desktop config.

[hakavlad]

What about changing %install?

[hakavlad]

Recommends: %{name}-desktop

Why?

[tim77]

What about changing %install?

Then we lost regular non-desktop version. Need to made to separate packages then.

Recommends: %{name}-desktop

Why?

Why what? It is optional weak dependency.

[hakavlad]

Why it is in Recommends? Why nohang depends on nohang-desktop?

[hakavlad]

What about 2 independant packages?

[tim77]

What about 2 independant packages?

Need to open new review-request, waiting, waiting, waiting...

Why it is in Recommends? Why nohang depends on nohang-desktop?

1. One more time - it not depends, it recommends it and could be skip easily if user wants.
2. It helps user with such questions.

For Fedora and RHEL8 possible to supplement already installed packages so maybe good idea to improve this case when DE or Xorg installed on target system.

Maybe better to made two systemd units for desktop and non desktop? :) Just asking.

[hakavlad]

@tim77 Could you make a rebuild, please?

[tim77]

Yep. I seen yesterday this #56 Not critical? It would be nice if you released new, tagged version which already tested.

[hakavlad]

#56 Seems like it is an old output bug, not critical

[tim77]

No rush then. :) Works for me and much more predictable compared to earlyoom.

[hakavlad]

much more predictable compared to earlyoom

Please write your review here https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/98

[tim77]

Using git snaphots is discouraged by Fedora as well. So agree with @KAMiKAZOW nohang should switch to releases/tags.

[hakavlad]

Packaging 0.1 seems antiquated after only a few months

BTW nohang 0.1 released more than year ago.

For release 0.2, I want to solve some problems and write documentation. Right now, on my localhost, the daemon is undergoing significant changes.

I want to close these issues to release:

• #69
• #68
• #65
• #64
• #57
• #56
• #52
• #49
• #42
• #21
• #22

[hakavlad]

Maybe I should close only #22 and release.

[hakavlad]

@KAMiKAZOW How to install nohang on openSUSE and on SLE? Could you make a PR to fix README.md, please?

[KAMiKAZOW]

It would be easier if you made a proper release, then I could submit it to the distribution itself.

[hakavlad]

@KAMiKAZOW Congratulations! https://github.com/hakavlad/nohang/releases/tag/v0.2.0

Also maybe you want to package new tools (prelockd, memavaild, uresourced), see https://github.com/hakavlad/nohang#solution