This is an introduction to gear
for the people who already have the RPM
packaging experience and know how to use git.
Gear is a set of tools for maintenance and release management of RPM packages based on a git repository. A gear-enabled git repository of a software package combines:
- software development history
- modifications necessary to produce an RPM package
- rules to bind software releases to specific RPM-based distribution releases
Developers using Gear need to understand
- a format of the rules file describing transformation procedures that convert a given git changeset and branches to a number of source files for a RPM package
- utilities for building packages and working with source code (importing upstream sources and managing patches)
RPM source packages are built using the following files:
- .spec file, which is roughly debian/* without debian/patches/*
- a number of source files/archives
- optionally patches containing local fixes to the upstream source code
Gear gives a way to automate generation of patches and source files off the git repostiory.
A source code of a project is generally tracked in a separate branch that could be synchronized with a corresponding upstream repository by traditional git tools. When the upstream of the project does not use a VCS that allows direct import into git, the source code can still be managed with archives and source RPM packages.
$ gear-srpmimport some-0.1.src.rpm
$ gear-srpmimport some-0.2.src.rpm
...
will import the given SRPMs to the branch ("srpms" by default) in the repository
(This operation is similar to git-import-dsc
from git-buildpackage
).
Importing SRPM creates a git layout similar to the "Like SRPM" scenario described below.
$ gear-update foo-0.2.tar.gz foo
$ gear-update foo-2.0.tar.gz foo
...
will update the subdirectory foo in the git repository with the contents of the
tarball. This operation is similar to git-import-orig
from git-buildpackage
.
As SRPMs may contain several sources, the source code is usually stored in a
subdirectory of the repository.
This should be obvious: just fetch/pull if the upstream uses git, or use
conversion tools (e.g. svn2git
, cvs2git
) if it has not yet migrated to git.
There are three major scenarios for keeping changes in the repository:
- Work with changes much like in SRPM era
- Keep patches in one branch
- Keep patches in specialized topic branches
This simple scenario where git is used just for keeping history, and the usual maintainer's workflow is not changed.
Branches in repository: master upstream
Tree layout:
foo/ (in upstream, master)
.gear/rules (in master)
foo.spec (in master)
foo-something-fixed.patch (in master)
foo-another-fixed.patch (in master)
git repository is generated by importing SRPMs or by creating from scratch.
Use master branch to make it a bit easier
$ mkdir foo
$ cd foo
$ git init foo
$ gear-update ../foo-1.0.tar.gz foo
$ git branch upstream
$ vi foo.spec
$ vi foo-something-fixed.patch
$ vi foo-another-fixed.patch
The .gear/rules will have the following content:
copy: foo-something-fixed.patch
copy: foo-another-fixed.patch
tar.gz: foo
This sample rules file describes a source tarball from a foo
directory and two patches.
Specfile is picked up automatically if there is only .spec in the root directory fo git.
Gear is relying on the whole history being recorded by git. This means that any changes you'd like to see in RPM, must be committed to the repository.
$ git add . # Commit the entire workdir
$ gear-commit # this is a wrapper around git-commit which uses the last
# changelog entry as a commit message.
This scenario is useful for packages which deviate from upstream with a small number of non-overlapping fixes here and there. This is also the easiest scenario to use.
Branches in repository: master upstream
Tree layout:
foo/ (in upstream, patched in master)
.gear/rules (in master)
foo.spec (in master)
$ git checkout master
$ vim ... # hack-hack
$ git add ... # add new files if needed (optional)
$ git commit
All the changes are applied just on top of the upstream source code.
The .gear/rules file will be of the following form:
tar: v@version@:foo
diff: diff: v@version@:foo foo
This will generate foo.tar, containing upstream source code, taken from the tag
v${version}
, where version is parsed from the foo.spec
, and the diff is
containing the difference between the directory foo in v${version}
tag and
current content of the directory foo.
Gear does not use real git tags, but instead it uses the tags stored in
.gear/tags
. The reason for that is to keep packages reproduceable over time as
tags may move but SHA1 labels recorded at the time of run of gear-update-tag
will be able to address original changesets properly.
The gear-update-tag
utility writes down SHA1 lables of all tags referenced in
package process to .gear/tags
.
$ gear-update-tag --all
Don't forget to commit the changes after updating:
$ git-commit .gear/tags -m 'tags updated'
$ git merge upstream
# ... Fix conflicts, update changelog, remove unnecesary patches etc ...
$ gear-commit
That's all! As patches are stored in a git branch, it's easy to update to a new upstream version: merge will detect most incosistences. As an additional bonus, if the upstream uses git as well, patches forwarded upstream and accepted there will not generate conflicts on merge.
$ vim ... # hack-hack, update changelog
$ gear-commit
Also simple.
This is a scenario for the packages where downstream maintainers do a lot of work (e.g. kernel) or they are upstream themselves. In this case each separate feature is maintained in a separate branch and gear rules are used to automatically produce patches for RPM.
Branches: upstream topic-A topic-B ... master
Tree layout:
foo/ (in upstream, patched in topic-*, master)
.gear/rules (in master)
foo.spec (in master)
All the work is done in topic branches, each is dedicated to some feature:
$ git checkout topic-A
$ vim ... # hack-hack-hack
$ git commit
$ git checkout topic-B
...
As patches may overlap, some conflict resolution needs to be involved. The naive approach would be using the following branching scheme:
* upstream
|
\--> topic-A
\--> topic-B
\--> master
And then generating patch-per-topic by using .gear/rules. This will not always work, as the generated patches might conflict.
To address the issue branching off each feature topic could be used:
* upstream
\-> topic-A
\-> topic-B
\-> master
And gear-merge(1) utility merges the branches as described in .gear/merge file:
merge: upstream topic-A
merge: topic-A topic-B
merge: topic-B master
After using this utility (and resolving all possible conflicts), master branch gets a cumulative change.
The .gear/rules file will be exactly the same as for the previous scenario, so the gear-update-tag(1) is also required:
tar: v@version@:foo
diff: diff: v@version@:foo foo
$ ... # obtain the new upstream code in upstream branch
$ gear-merge
... Fix conflicts, update changelog, remove unnecessary patches etc...
$ gear-commit
Due to gear-merge, it's only necessary to fix the conflicts once.
$ vim ... # hack-hack, commit
$ gear-merge
$ gear-hsh
gear-hsh
first uses .gear/rules file to produce all needed parts of a SRPM.
After that gear will supply a created SRPM to a
hasher build environment.
There are also other build commands: gear-rpm (uses rpmbuild
instead of
hasher) and
gear-remote-hsh/gear-remote-rpm, which use remote host for actual building
(communicating over SSH).