This document briefly compares differences between the SUSE and Fedora
packaging guidelines from the point of the SUSE packaging guidelines.

For questions please contact Anicka Bernathova <anicka@suse.cz>.

Important notes:

libexecdir:

SuSE does not allow it. Users should use %{_prefix}/lib or
%{_prefix}/lib/%{name} or a special dedicated directory. Note that it
is %{_prefix}/lib (platform independent), not %{_libdir} (platform
dependent).

changelogs:

Internally we use .changes files, which are converted to spec
changes.

License tag: Compare abbreviations.

Usually, the PreReq tag should be replaced by plain Requires: Yes, if
it is possible. Sometimes it is not. Note that new version of RPM
deprecate PreReq in favor of Requires(pre), Requires(post). But it
does not define Requires(pretrans) and Requires(posttrans), so it is
only a half usable.

The Source tag documents where to find the upstream sources for the
rpm. In most cases this should be a complete URL to the upstream
tarball. SuSE rule prefers recompression to .tar.bz2.

BuildRoot tag: Our standard value is:
BuildRoot:      %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-build


Prepping BuildRoot For %install
According to SuSE conventions, this is bad and vulnerable to race
condition attacks and should not be used. RPM does it for you in a
secure way (at least in all several years old versions):
%install
rm -rf %{buildroot}
or
%install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT


Second, the Epoch must be listed...

SuSE does not allow Epoch in their packages.

BuildRequires exceptions: Compare lists. (minimal buildsystem)


Summary and description: Discuss use of articles, capitalization,
e. g.:
A Program for Editing
Program for editing
This tool allows you to edit files.


Encoding: SuSE has broken support for UTF-8 in spec files (Authors
list etc.)


Non-ASCII Filenames: OT note: We have glib2 tricks.


Debuginfo packages: Tags added by the build system.


Exclusion of Static Libraries and .la files: SuSE still has it, but
trying to link static often fails (pkg-config does not support mixed
statis/shared library environment). Now .la files are deprecated.

Packager must provide rationale for a -static subpackage: Good idea,
not in SuSE (although deprecated).


Why the %makeinstall macro should not be used: This section is
outdated. At least in SuSE %makeinstall now expands to "make
DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install".

Parallel make:
make %{?_smp_mflags} x make %{?jobs:-j%jobs}

macro %{lang_package} - new rule for SUSE, only in SUSE, although not SUSE specific

%suse_update_desktop_file (SUSE, inhouse translation, more features) vs. desktop-file-install (Fedora)

gconf scriptlets (our own macros)





Technical problems to discuss:

Is -devel package mandatory for development files or it is allowed to
package it in the main package (e. g. if the -devel package would
contain only one .pc file or one .h file).

Collect -devel dependencies.

Scriptlets and triggers: Implementation in RPM and real needs.

Use of advanced Requirements, Supplements, Recommends. zypp
implementation.

It seems that Fedora has a lot of tools for searching of missing
BuildRequires: SuSE people don't know rpmdev-rmdevelrpms, mock, mach,
rpmdev-rmdevelrpms.

We should discuss, whether to prefer RPM variables or shell variables
in the spec file. There is no consensus in SuSE nor Fedora (e. g.
$RPM_OPT_FLAGS/%{optflags}), whether to prefer brackets etc.


Init scripts and desktop files conventions, desktop-file-install x
%suse_update_desktop_file.

RPM categories, tags, macros.

Directories for server, browser plugins etc.



Configuration files:

AFAIK, Gentoo has the best tool for backporting of configuration
changes. It consists of backup of intact copy of any %config file,
diffing against old copy and patching new copy.



Minor notes:

shareware can be Open Source (e. g. xv)

Removing Rpath: Docs is missing several special variables:
C_INCLUDE_PATH, LIBRARY_PATH,...