= How to create an RPM package

'''

[NOTE]
======

This page was automatically converted from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package

It is probably

* Badly formatted
* Missing graphics and tables that do not covert well from mediawiki
* Out-of-date
* In need of other love

Please fix it, remove this notice, and then add to `_topic_map.yml`

Pull requests accepted at https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/fedora-howto

Once that is live, go to the original wiki page and add an `{{old}}`
tag, followed by a note like

....
{{admon/note|This page has a new home!|
This wiki page is no longer maintained. Please find the up-to-date
version at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/whatever-the-url
}}
....

======

'''


__TOC__

[[introduction]]
Introduction
~~~~~~~~~~~~

This page describes in detail how to create an RPM package, and in
particular how to create a specfile. Unlike other RPM guides, this page
explains the specifics for Fedora with links to Fedora-specific
guidelines and usage of Fedora-specific utilities. Despite the focus on
Fedora, much of this document does apply to other RPM-based
distributions.

Fedora Documentation had released a draft guide for packagers, see
http://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Packagers_Guide[Packagers
Guide]. It is archived.

Please note that this document is merely a gentle introduction and will
leave out many of the details which you may need in order to package
more complicated software. It also assumes that you have familiarity
with the shell and are familiar with the process of building and
installing (outside of RPM) the software you wish to package. Finally,
this document is *NOT* an official Fedora packaging guideline. This page
is open for editing by the general Fedora packaging community, while the
actual packaging guidelines are managed by the
Packaging:Committee[Packaging Committee]. For reference, here are some
of the most referenced guideline pages:

* Packaging:Guidelines[Packaging Guidelines]
* Packaging:LicensingGuidelines[Licensing Guidelines]
* Packaging:Naming[ Package Naming Guidelines]
* Packaging:DistTag[ Dist Tag Guidelines]
* Packaging:ReviewGuidelines[ Package Review Guidelines]
* Packaging:Scriptlets[ Recipes for RPM scriptlets]

Packaging:Guidelines and Packaging:Naming contain the main guidelines.
Having said that, this page should be compatible with them, though the
guidelines do change over time and this page may diverge from them on
occasion.

If you plan to submit a package to the official Fedora repository, you
will also want to follow the procedure depicted in
link:Join_the_package_collection_maintainers[Join the package collection
maintainers].

[[some-terminology]]
Some terminology
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

RPM::
  The package manager used by Fedora, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Mageia,
  OpenSUSE and others. Originally RPM stood for "Red Hat Package
  Manager" but now it's just the recursive acronym "RPM Package
  Manager".

specfile::
  A plain text file containing information about a package and
  instructions used by RPM for actually compiling the included software.
  It is named by appending `.spec` to the name of the package.

tag::
  A string, generally capitalized and followed by a colon, which appears
  at the top of the specfile to provide some important data about the
  RPM, such as `Name:`, `Version:` or `Summary:`.

section::
  A segment of the specfile which tells RPM how to perform some portion
  of the package construction process. Many, but not all, sections
  contain code that is simply passed to the shell, though RPM has
  significant flexibility around this which will not be covered at all
  in this document.

section header::
  A short string, starting with `%` at the beginning of a line, which
  introduces a section. Examples include `%description`, `%prep` and
  `%files`.

macro::
  A short string, always prefixed by `%` and generally surrounded by
  curly brackets (`{}`) which RPM will convert to a different and
  usually longer string. Some macros can take arguments and some can be
  quite complex. Some macros are provided by RPM, some are part of and ,
  but many other packages also provide them. If you're curious, running
  `rpm --showrc` will show you all of the macros currently available on
  your system, but note that you really don't want to use most of the
  ones you see there. Note that some macros have named prefixed by
  underscores; the reasons for this are mostly lost to time.
  +
  The packaging guidelines have various
  Packaging:Guidelines#Macros[suggestions and restrictions] regarding
  the use of various sets of macros. This document will use what the
  guidelines recommend, but won't necessarily explain the reasons in
  detail.
  +
  You may, in looking at other packages, see macros used without curly
  brackets. There are situations where this isn't strictly necessary,
  but these guidelines will use them wherever possible to make it more
  obvious when macros are being used and to avoid going into the rules
  about when the brackets are needed and when they aren't.

mock::
  A system for building RPMs within their own separate small Fedora
  installation. This avoids the need to have a full set of build
  dependencies installed into your regular operating system
  installation, allows you to build packages for different Fedora
  releases, and in general is a good thing.

koji::
  The main Fedora build system: https://koji.fedoraproject.org[1].

[[editors-for-editing-rpm-spec-files]]
Editors for editing RPM spec files
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Many editors (like text editors and IDEs) that are in the official
repositories of Fedora have out-of-the-box syntax-highlighting support
for RPM spec files, these include:

* CodeEditor. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script code found
in RPM spec files.
* gedit. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script code found in RPM
spec files.
* link:GNU_nano[GNU nano]. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script
code found in RPM spec files.
* Joe. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script code found in RPM
spec files.
* Kate. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script code found in RPM
spec files.
* KWrite. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script code found in
RPM spec files.
* Pluma. It does not syntax-highlight the shell script code found in RPM
spec files.
* Vim (and, of course, its graphical counterpart, gVim). It also
syntax-highlights the shell script code found in RPM spec files.

while the following are present in the official Fedora repositories but
do not come with out-of-the-box syntax-highlighting for RPM Spec files,
but do gain said support when optional packages/plugins are installed:

* Eclipse can develop RPM spec file editing support when the
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/eclipse-rpm-editor[RPM Spec file
editor] package is also installed. This package also provides code
linting (checking for RPM packaging errors) and make it easier to
navigate the spec file.
* link:GNU_Emacs[GNU Emacs] has editing support for RPM spec files when
the https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/emacs-rpm-spec-mode[RPM spec
mode] package is installed.

Editors that are not in the official repositories of Fedora but are
available for Fedora and, with the appropriate plugins, can
syntax-highlight RPM spec files include:

* Atom, with the
https://atom.io/packages/language-rpm-spec[language-rpm-spec] package.
* link:Visual_Studio_Code[Visual Studio Code], with the
https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=1dot75cm.RPMSpec[RPM
Spec] extension.

[[preparing-your-system]]
Preparing your system
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Before you create RPM packages on Fedora, you need to install some
packaging tools and set up the account(s) you will use. Run this as
root:

`dnf install fedora-packager fedora-review`

This will install the utilities needed to work with and build packages
in the same manner used to maintain official Fedora packages, including
the tool used by package reviewers to check package quality.

As root, add yourself to the mock group:

`usermod -a -G mock yourusername`

This should be the last time you need root unless you wish to install
packages you have developed.

You may afterwards need to run `newgrp` or log out and back in for this
change to take effect. Run the `id` command to see if the "mock" group
appears in your group list.

If you have already obtained a Fedora account and accepted the
contributor agreement, you can also set up your fedora certificates and
such. Just run (as your user, not as root):

`fedora-packager-setup`

If you wish, you can also create a separate user and use it for doing
RPM development. You should make sure that user is part of the "mock"
group and has run `fedora-packager-setup`.

[[first-steps]]
First steps
~~~~~~~~~~~

To create an RPM package, you will need to create a directory to hold
the package and, within that directory, the specfile. This file provides
information about the software being packaged, instructions for
unpacking it, building it and installing it, as well as a list of files
which will be included in the package. You then run the `fedpkg` command
with appropriate options, which will go through a series of steps to
produce your package.

The construction of the specfile is often done iteratively (one relevant
piece at a time), and that's what we'll do here. But first we'll need
someplace to make our package as well as something to package. Run the
following to create a directory to hold packaging work (called
`packaging-work`), within it a place to hold our package (called
"`howdy`), and within that a simple program to package (also called
"`howdy`). You can use any location you like but the directory name for
the package should match the name of the package.

`mkdir -p ~/packaging-work/howdy` +
`cd ~/packaging-work/howdy` +
`cat << EOF > howdy` +
`#!/bin/bash` +
`echo "Howdy, partner!"` +
`EOF` +
`chmod 644 howdy`

You should be able to run `bash howdy` and receive the expected output.
Now we have something we can package, so let's start making a specfile.
We'll start with a very minimal template (which will have to be expanded
for anything more complicated than this example). Just start your editor
on a new file called `howdy.spec`" and paste this in. Please use spaces
and not tabs. It's not necessary to have everything like up but it does
make it look nice.

....
Name:    howdy
Version: 1
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: Say hello, Texas style

License: Public Domain
Source0: howdy

%description
A simple program to greet the user, Texas style.

%install

%files

%changelog
....

So we've described the package, indicated a version and listed the one
source file we have. We have an `%install` and a `%files` section, both
of which are empty. Save your edits and run

`fedpkg --release f`` local`

This is called a "local build". Assuming no typos or other issues, you
should get some output and two RPM files. One should be the source
package, which contains everything necessary for someone else (or the
Fedora build system) to build their own copy of your package. The other
is a binary package. It doesn't actually have anything in it at this
point, though, because we didn't tell RPM to actually include any files.
(It would not even have been created if we hadn't included the empty
`%files` section.)

If you like, you can look at either package using `rpm -qip`, or just
`less`.

[[a-useful-package]]
A useful package
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So now we have a minimally functional specfile which builds and produces
a rather useless binary package.

In order to actually make a package which does something, we must tell
RPM how to install the program. Edit the specfile and add this to the
`%install` section (immediately after the line containing `%install`):

`mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}` +
`install -p -m 755 %{SOURCE0} %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}`

The contents of the `%install` section is just a shell script! Note that
we've used three macros:

* `%{buildroot}` is set to a temporary directory called "the buildroot"
that's set up by RPM to hold the complete tree of files we'll install.
* `%{_bindir}` is just /usr/bin.
* `%{SOURCE0}` refers to the file listed earlier in the spec with the
`Source0:` tag.

This saves us from having to care about exactly where those files and
directories are located on the filesystem while the package is built;
instead we only care about where those files are ending up. And without
`%{buildroot}` we'd end up installing those files directly onto our
development machine, which would be bad, especially if running as root.

Now do a local build. It failed! But why? Well, because of this:

`error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:` +
`   /usr/bin/howdy`

We installed a file but didn't tell RPM about it. RPM maybe could just
include everything we install, but there are plenty of good reasons why
it doesn't just do that. So tell RPM about that file, by adding this to
the `%files` section:

`%{_bindir}/howdy`

Note that `%files` is generally about files we've actually installed
into the buildroot. You do not use the `%{buildroot}` macro when listing
files there.

Now do another local build. If all goes well, you should have two
updated RPMs, and the binary one should contain a file. But there's one
more thing we should add to the spec to make this a complete package.
Since all we're packaging is a shell script, there is no reason at all
for this to be built separately on each architecture Fedora supports. So
edit the spec once more and add the following immediately after the
`Source0:` line:

`BuildArch: noarch`

This tells RPM that there's nothing architecture-specific about a
particular package. You can reindent the spec if you like to make things
line up, but please use spaces and not tabs. Delete the existing `.rpm`
files in this directory and do another local build. Now you should have
a pair of rpms: one with the updated source, and one ending in
`.noarch.rpm` indicating an architecture-independent package. You should
now have your first complete package that you built yourself! If you
like, install it and try it out. You'll probably want to remove it once
you're done, unless you just like Texas-style greetings.

[[further-things-to-do-with-our-package]]
Further things to do with our package
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Have a glance at our current spec if you like.

....
 
Name:      howdy
Version:   1
Release:   1%{?dist}
Summary:   Say hello, Texas style

License:   Public Domain
Source0:   howdy
BuildArch: noarch

%description
A simple program to greet the user, Texas style.

%install
mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}
install -p -m 755 %{SOURCE0} %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}

%files
%{_bindir}/howdy

%changelog
....

You may recall that RPM handles dependencies, but we didn't indicate
anything about that in the specfile. Let's look.

` rpm -qp --requires howdy-1-1.fc``.noarch.rpm`

You'll see that RPM added some internal `rpmlib` dependencies, plus one
on `/bin/bash` which matches up with the first line of the howdy
program. Often RPM will handle dependencies for your binary packages
automatically. Often times it won't, and we'll look into that later.

You can also replace `--requires` by `--provides` to see the other side
of the dependency equation. There's not much of interest there, but if
something did depend on `howdy` then this package would provide it.

Next thing to do is run some checks on our package:

` fedpkg --release f`` lint`

This will spit out a few complaints. Four total about the lack of
`%prep` and `%build` sections, one about the lack of a `URL:` tag, and
one about the lack of a proper changelog. You may also see other
complaints, perhaps about permissions. The full set of complaints may
change over time as the checking program, itself changes. You may even
have noticed these complaints earlier if your editor was configured to
automatically check specfiles as you edit them.

We will ignore the complaints about the lack of the two sections and a
URL. We could make the complaints go away by adding empty sections and a
dummy URL, but that's not productive and our next experiment will have
them.

It would indeed be nice to have a changelog section, though. Your editor
may have the capability to add one automatically; in it's (unless you've
changed the leader key) and in it's . If you want to do it manually,
have a look at the relevant Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs[guidelines].
I'll add mine here:

`* Mon Sep 19 2016 Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@math.uh.edu> - 1-1` +
`- Initial packaging.`

[[building-in-mock]]
Building in mock
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The next interesting thing to do would be to see if our package will
build in the way that the Fedora build system would do it. To do this,
just run:

`fedpkg --release f`` mockbuild`

This will build your package in . Running mock will set up a complete
minimal Fedora installation inside a directory and then build the
package within that.

The end result should be a significant amount of output, a results_howdy
directory, and a couple of levels deep a three log files and two
packages. Feel free to look at those.

You can also build for other releases in this manner, by changing what
you pass to the `--release` option. This can be useful for testing, but
it takes another big download so we'll skip that now.

[[building-in-koji]]
Building in koji
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If you had your Fedora account set up at the time you started following
this document, you can build your package in the central Fedora build
system, though the syntax can be a bit odd:

`fedpkg --release f`` scratch-build --target f`` --srpm`

This will create a source package, upload it to the build servers, and
give you some output including a URL you can visit to watch the process
and download the built packages afterwards. This can be useful to test
that your package builds on the various different architectures that
Fedora supports, although your current test package doesn't need such
testing.

[[running-fedora-review]]
Running fedora-review
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Package reviewers use as part of the process of accepting new packages
into the distribution. You can run this tool yourself as a useful set of
informative checks. First, clean up your package directory:

`rm -rf *rpm results*`

Then create a source package and run the utility:

`fedpkg --release f`` srpm` +
`fedora-review -n howdy`

This will use mock to build your package and run a number of checks on
it. It will be silent while mock runs, so it may appear as if it has
hung when in reality it is doing a large amount of downloading. You can
add `-v` to make it somewhat more verbose.

When done, you should have a `review-howdy` directory with various files
and directories. `rpmlint.txt` should have some additional rpmlint
output for you. `review.txt` is the template that a reviewer would fill
in (in addition to checking the functionality of the software in your
package, etc.) Most of that is probably not of interest to you, but it
doesn't hurt to have a look.

[[on-to-a-more-complex-program]]
On to a more complex program
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now that we've covered the absolute basics, we can move on to packaging
something more complicated, which comes from a real upstream and has to
be unpacked and built. A good package to use as an example is
https://www.gnu.org/software/hello/[GNU Hello]. Have a look there, note
the current version of Hello (2.10 as this document is being written)
and the download URL, licensing information and such. It's helpful to
keep that page open for referenceLet's create a directory and work in
it:

` mkdir -p ~/packaging-work/hello` +
` cd ~/packaging-work/hello`

And create the following specfile named `hello.spec`:

....
Name:    hello
Version: 2.10
Release: 1%{?dist}
Summary: GNU Hello
URL:     https://www.gnu.org/software/hello/
License: GPLv3+

Source0: https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/hello/hello-%{version}.tar.gz

%description
The GNU hello program produces a familiar, friendly greeting. It allows
nonprogrammers to use a classic computer science tool which would otherwise be
unavailable to them. Because it is protected by the GNU General Public License,
users are free (in perpetuity) to share and change it.

%prep

%build

%install

%files

%changelog
....

We've filled in a few things here. There's now a `URL:` tag, pointing to
the Hello homepage. The `%description` was cribbed from the homepage.
The `License:` tag has changed, since the bottom of the homepage says
that the license is "under the terms of the GNU General Public License
as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the
License, or (at your option) any later version.". Licensing is a
difficult subject, and we'll cover it in more depth later, but for now
it's sufficient to note that Fedora indicates this type of license with
"GPLv3+".

Perhaps the most interesting change is to the `Source0:` tag. It now has
a URL instead of a filename: using a URL tells everyone, including the
relevant Fedora utilities, where to actually get the source. And there's
a macro in there: `%{version}` is automatically set to whatever you used
for the `Version:` tag. Combining the two lets things automatically get
an updated copy of the source whenever the version changes. But how do
we actually get that source, since now we can't cut and paste that URL?
Try `spectool`:

`spectool -g *spec`

This quickly grabs all of the sources mentioned in the spec, and will
leave us with `hello-2.10.tar.gz` in our package directory. Have a look
with that file:

`less *tar.gz`

and we see that everything in there unpacks unto a single directory
named `hello-2.10`. We'll need to tell RPM how to unpack that archive
and how to find the files within. Add this to the `%prep` section:

`%autosetup`

This is a rather complicated macro which RPM will replace with plain old
shell code to unpack the archive, change into a directory and fix up
some permissions. It by default expects the directory to be named
`%{name}-%{version}` (where `%{name}` is, you guessed it, what you gave
for the `Name:` tag). This can be changed by passing the `-n` option,
but in our case the default is just what we need. You can see exactly
what it does by executing the `%prep` section with:

`fedpkg --release f`` prep`

This will call just the `%prep` section of your specfile, and should
leave you with a directory named `hello-2.10` in your package directory.
Have a look around in there. You'll see this is a standard GNU package
with a `configure` file, and that tells us most of what we need to know
in order to build it. Add this to the `%build` section:

`%configure` +
`%make_build`

This just calls the `configure` file with all of the arguments necessary
to build in Fedora, and then calls `make` with the necessary options.
And while we're at it, let's add this to `%install`:

`%make_install`

This calls the usual `make install` with Fedora's special macros to get
everything into the buildroot. If you do a mockbuild at this point,
you'll see that the build fails, just like with the previous package,
there are installed but unpackaged files. The list of files below the
error heading in the output, tells us what we need to do next, but
because there's an info page, a manpage and some locale files, we have a
few different rules to follow.

[[old-document-below]]
Old document below
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If there are special programs that are required to build or run the
program you are packaging, install those other programs and write down
what they are.

To package a program for the Fedora repository, you must package
pristine (original) sources, along with the patches and build
instructions; it's *not* okay to start with pre-compiled code. Install
the file with the original source (usually a `.tar.gz` file) in the
`~/rpmbuild/SOURCES` directory (of the RPM building user account).

Read through the manual installation instructions for your program. It's
often a good idea to do a "dry run" by manually building the program
before attempting to do so via RPM. With a few exceptions, all binaries
and libraries included in Fedora packages must be built from the source
code that is included in the source package.

[[creating-a-spec-file]]
Creating a SPEC file
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You now need to create a SPEC file in the `~/rpmbuild/SPECS` directory.
You should name it after the program name (e.g. "`program.spec`"). Use
the archive name or the name advocated by the software author where you
can, but be sure to follow the link:Packaging/NamingGuidelines[Package
Naming Guidelines].

[[spec-templates-and-examples]]
SPEC templates and examples
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[[templates]]
Templates
+++++++++

You may use the `rpmdev-newspec` command to create a SPEC file for you.
`rpmdev-newspec <package-name>` can create an initial SPEC file for a
new package, tailored to various types of packages. It will guess what
kind of template to use based on the package name, or you can specify a
particular template. See `/etc/rpmdevtools/spectemplate-*.spec` for
available templates, and see `rpmdev-newspec --help` for more
information. For example, to create a new SPEC file for a python module:

`cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS` +
`rpmdev-newspec python-antigravity` +
`vim python-antigravity.spec`

According to the
Packaging:Guidelines#Writing_a_package_from_scratch[packaging
guidelines], new spec files should be created this way. Vim and emacs
can automatically create simple templates, but these are different than
those made with `rpmdev-newspec`. This is especially true for templates
with names beginning with `python-` or `-perl`.

Here is an example auto-generated `.spec` template:

`Name:           testprogram` +
`Version:        ` +
`Release:        1%{?dist}` +
`Summary:        ` +
 +
`License:        ` +
`URL:            ` +
`Source0:        ` +
 +
`BuildRequires:  ` +
`Requires:       ` +
 +
`%description` +
 +
 +
`%prep` +
`%setup -q` +
 +
 +
`%build` +
`%configure` +
`%make_build` +
 +
 +
`%install` +
`%make_install` +
 +
 +
`%files` +
`%doc` +
 +
 +
 +
`%changelog` +
`* Sun Apr  3 2016 makerpm` +
`-`

[[examples]]
Examples
++++++++

[[eject]]
eject

Here's a simple example showing a Fedora specfile for the `eject`
program:

....
Summary:            A program that ejects removable media using software control
Name:               eject
Version:            2.1.5
Release:            21%{?dist}
License:            GPLv2+
Source:             %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
Patch1:             eject-2.1.1-verbose.patch
Patch2:             eject-timeout.patch
Patch3:             eject-2.1.5-opendevice.patch
Patch4:             eject-2.1.5-spaces.patch
Patch5:             eject-2.1.5-lock.patch
Patch6:             eject-2.1.5-umount.patch
URL:                http://www.pobox.com/~tranter
ExcludeArch:        s390 s390x
BuildRequires:      gettext
BuildRequires:      libtool

%description
The eject program allows the user to eject removable media (typically
CD-ROMs, floppy disks or Iomega Jaz or Zip disks) using software
control. Eject can also control some multi-disk CD changers and even
some devices' auto-eject features.

Install eject if you'd like to eject removable media using software
control.

%prep
%autosetup -n %{name}

%build
%configure
%make_build

%install
%make_install

install -m 755 -d %{buildroot}/%{_sbindir}
ln -s ../bin/eject %{buildroot}/%{_sbindir}

%find_lang %{name}

%files -f %{name}.lang
%license COPYING
%doc README TODO ChangeLog
%{_bindir}/*
%{_sbindir}/*
%{_mandir}/man1/*

%changelog
* Tue Feb 08 2011 Fedora Release Engineering <rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org> - 2.1.5-21
- Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_Mass_Rebuild

* Fri Jul 02 2010 Kamil Dudka <kdudka@redhat.com> 2.1.5-20
- handle multi-partition devices with spaces in mount points properly (#608502)
....

[[section]]

[[spec-file-overview]]
SPEC file overview
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other useful guides:

* http://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch-creating-rpms.html[RPM
Guide] describes how to write a SPEC file.
* The IBM series "Packaging software with RPM"
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm1/[Part 1],
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm2/[Part 2], and
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm3/[Part 3].
* http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/[Maximum RPM] has the most complete
information, but is dated.

You will need to follow the Fedora guidelines:
link:Packaging/NamingGuidelines[Package Naming Guidelines],
link:Packaging/Guidelines[Packaging guidelines], and
link:Packaging/ReviewGuidelines[Package review guidelines].

Insert comments with a leading "`#`" character, and beware of macros
(beginning with `%`) that are potentially multi-line, as they are
expanded first. When commenting out a line, double the percent signs
(`%%`) of the macros appearing after the "`#`". Also avoid inline
comments on the same line as script commands.

The major tags are listed below. Note that the macros `%{name}`,
`%{version}` and `%{release}` can be used to refer to the Name, Version
and Release tags respectively. When you change the tag, the macros
automatically update to use the new value.

* *Name*: The (base) name of the package, which should match the SPEC
file name. It must follow the link:Packaging/NamingGuidelines[Package
Naming Guidelines] and generally be lowercase.
* *Version*: The upstream version number. See
link:Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Version_Tag[Version tag section] of the
packaging guidelines. If the version contains tags that are non-numeric
(contains tags that are not numbers), you may need to include the
additional non-numeric characters in the Release tag. If upstream uses
full dates to distinguish versions, consider using version numbers of
the form `yy.mm[dd]` (e.g. `2008-05-01` becomes `8.05`).
* *Release*: The initial value should normally be `1%{?dist}`. Increment
the number every time you release a new package for the same version of
software. When a new upstream version is released, change the Version
tag to match and reset the Release number to `1`. See
link:Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Release_Tag[Release tag section] of the
packaging guidelines. The optional link:Packaging/DistTag[Dist tag]
might be useful.
* *Summary*: A brief, one-line summary of the package. Use American
English. *Do NOT end in a period.*
* *Group*: This needs to be a pre-existing group, like
"Applications/Engineering"; run "`less /usr/share/doc/rpm/GROUPS`" to
see the complete list. Use the group "Documentation" for any
sub-packages (e.g. `kernel-doc`) containing documentation. __'__Note:
This tag is deprecated since Fedora 17. See
https://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Packagers_Guide/chap-Packagers_Guide-Spec_File_Reference-Preamble.html[Spec
File Reference Preamble] _'_
* *License*: The license, which must be an open source software license.
Do _not_ use the old Copyright tag. Use a standard abbreviation (e.g.
"`GPLv2+`") and be specific (e.g. use "`GPLv2+`" for GPL version 2 or
greater instead of just "`GPL`" or "`GPLv2`" where it's true). See
Licensing and the link:Packaging/LicensingGuidelines[Licensing
Guidelines]. You can list multiple licenses by combining them with
"`and`" and "`or`" (e.g. "`GPLv2 and BSD`").
* *URL*: The full URL for more information about the program (e.g. the
project website). *_Note: This is not where the original source code
came from which is meant for the Source0 tag below_*.
* *Source0*: The full URL for the compressed archive containing the
(original) pristine source code, as upstream released it. "`Source`" is
synonymous with "`Source0`". If you give a full URL (and you should),
its basename will be used when looking in the `SOURCES` directory. If
possible, embed `%{name}` and `%{version}`, so that changes to either
will go to the right place. Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps[Preserve
timestamps] when downloading source files. If there is more than one
source, name them `Source1`, `Source2` and so on. If you're adding whole
new files in addition to the pristine sources, list them as sources
_after_ the pristine sources. A copy of each of these sources will be
included in any SRPM you create, unless you specifically direct
otherwise. See link:Packaging/SourceURL[Source URL] for more information
on special cases (e.g. revision control).
* *Patch0*: The name of the first patch to apply to the source code. If
you need to patch the files after they've been uncompressed, you should
edit the files and save their differences as a "patch" file in your
`~/rpmbuild/SOURCES` directory. Patches should make only one logical
change each, so it's quite possible to have multiple patch files.
* *BuildArch*: If you're packaging files that are
architecture-independent (e.g. shell scripts, data files), then add
"`BuildArch: noarch`". The architecture for the binary RPM will then be
"`noarch`".
* *BuildRoot*: This is where files will be "installed" during the
%install process (after the %build process). This is now redundant in
Fedora and is only needed for EPEL5. By default, the build root is
placed in "`%{_topdir}/BUILDROOT/`".
* *BuildRequires*: A comma-separated list of packages required for
building (compiling) the program. This field can be (and is commonly)
repeated on multiple lines. These dependencies are _not_ automatically
determined, so you need to include _everything_ needed to build the
program. It is possible to ensure you have specified all necessary build
requires by link:Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds[performing a "mock
build"] of your package. You can specify a minimum version if necessary
(e.g. "`ocaml >= 3.08`"). If you need the file `/EGGS`, determine the
package that owns it by running "`rpm -qf /EGGS`". If you need the
program `EGGS`, determine the package that owns it by running
"`rpm -qf \`which EGGS\``". Keep dependencies to a minimum (e.g. use
`sed` instead of `perl` if you don't really need perl's abilities), but
beware that some applications permanently disable functions if the
associated dependency is not present; in those cases you may need to
include the additional packages. The package may be helpful.
* *Requires*: A comma-separate list of packages that are required when
the program is installed. Note that the BuildRequires tag lists what is
required to build the binary RPM, while the Requires tag lists what is
required when installing/running the program; a package may be in one
list or in both. In many cases, `rpmbuild` automatically detects
dependencies so the Requires tag is not always necessary. However, you
may wish to highlight some specific packages as being required, or they
may not be automatically detected.
* *%description*: A longer, multi-line description of the program. Use
American English. All lines must be 80 characters or less. Blank lines
indicate a new paragraph. Some graphical user interface installation
programs will reformat paragraphs; lines that start with whitespace will
be treated as preformatted text and displayed as is, normally with a
fixed-width font. See
https://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch09s03.html[RPM
Guide].
* *%prep*: Script commands to "prepare" the program (e.g. to uncompress
it) so that it will be ready for building. Typically this is just
"`%autosetup`"; a common variation is "`%autosetup -n NAME`" if the
source file unpacks into `NAME`. See the %prep section below for more.
* *%build*: Script commands to "build" the program (e.g. to compile it)
and get it ready for installing. The program should come with
instructions on how to do this. See the %build section below for more.
* *%install*: Script commands to "install" the program. The commands
should copy the files from the `BUILD` directory `%{_builddir}` into the
buildroot directory, `%{buildroot}`. See the %install section below for
more.
* *%check*: Script commands to "test" the program. This is run after the
%install procedure, so place it there if you have this section. Often it
simply contains "`make test`" or "`make check`". This is separated from
%build so that people can skip the self-test if they desire.
* *%clean*: Instructions to clean out the build root. Note that this
section is now redundant in Fedora and is only necessary for EPEL.
Typically this contains only:

`rm -rf %{buildroot}`

* *%files*: The list of files that will be installed. See the %files
section below for more.
* *%changelog*: Changes in the package. Use the format example above.
*Do NOT put software's changelog at here.This changelog is for RPM
itself.*
* *ExcludeArch*: If the package does not successfully compile, build or
work on a particular architecture, list those architectures under this
tag.
* You can add sections so that code will run when packages are installed
or removed on the real system (as opposed to just running the %install
script, which only does a pseudo-install to the build root). These are
called "scriptlets", and they are usually used to update the running
system with information from the package. See the "Scriptlets" section
below for more.

RPM also supports the creation of several packages (called
link:How_to_create_an_RPM_package#Subpackages[subpackages]) from a
single SPEC file, such as `name-libs` and `name-devel` packages.

Do *not* create a "relocatable" package; they don't add value in Fedora
and make things more complicated.

[[spec-file-sections-explained]]
SPEC file sections explained
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[[prep-section]]
%prep section
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The %prep section describes how to unpack the compressed packages so
that they can be built. Typically, this includes the "`%autosetup`"
command. Alternatively, you can use "`%setup`" and "`%patch`" commands
with reference to the Source0 (and Source1 etc.) lines. See the
http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-macros.html[Maximum RPM section
on %setup and %patch] for more details.

The %\{patches} and %\{sources} macros are available since RPM 4.4.2 and
are useful if you have a large list of patches or sources and %autosetup
is not what you want, then you can do:

`for p in %{patches}; do` +
`    ...` +
`done`

However, keep in mind that using these will make your SPEC incompatible
with RPMS used in RHEL and other RPM-based dirstributions.

[[prep-section-autosetup-command]]
%prep section: %autosetup command
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The "`%autosetup`" command unpacks a source package. Switches include:

* *`-n` _name_* : If the Source tarball unpacks into a directory whose
name is not the RPM name, this switch can be used to specify the correct
directory name. For example, if the tarball unpacks into the directory
FOO, use "`%autosetup -n FOO`".
* *`-c` _name_* : If the Source tarball unpacks into multiple
directories instead of a single directory, this switch can be used to
create a directory named _name_ and then unpack into it.

If you use "`%setup`" command instead, then _`-q`_' is commonly used to
suppress unecessary output.

There are http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-macros.html[more
%setup options if you are unpacking multiple files], which is primarily
useful if you are creating subpackages (see below). The key ones are:

[cols=",",]
|=======================================================================
|`-a number` |Only unpack the Source directive of the given number after
changing directory (e.g. "`–a 0`" for Source0).

|`-b number` |Only unpack the Source directive of the given number
before changing directory (e.g. "`–b 0`" for Source0).

|`-D` |Do not delete the directory before unpacking.

|`-T` |Disable the automatic unpacking of the archives.
|=======================================================================

[[prep-section-patch-commands]]
%prep section: %patch commands
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If you have used "`%autosetup`" command, the following manual patch
management is not necessary. If you have complex requirements or need
compatibility with EPEL, you may still need this. The "`%patch0`"
command applies Patch0 (and %patch1 applies Patch1 etc.). Patches are
the normal method of making necessary changes to the source code for
packaging. The usual "`-pNUMBER`" option applies, which passes that
argument onto the program `patch`.

Patch file names often look like "`telnet-0.17-env.patch`", which is the
format `%{name} - %{version} - REASON.patch`" (though sometimes version
is omitted). Patch files are typically the result of "`diff -u`"; if you
do this from the subdirectory of `~/rpmbuild/BUILD` then you won't have
to specify a `-p` level later.

This is a typical procedure for creating a patch for a single file:

`cp foo/bar foo/bar.orig` +
`vim foo/bar` +
`diff -u foo/bar.orig foo/bar > ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/PKGNAME.REASON.patch`

If editing many files, one easy method is to copy the whole subdirectory
underneath `BUILD` and then do subdirectory diffs. After you have
changed directory to "`~rpmbuild/BUILD/NAME`", do the following:

`cp -pr ./ ../PACKAGENAME.orig/` +
`... many edits ...` +
`diff -ur ../PACKAGENAME.orig . > ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/`__`NAME`__`.`__`REASON`__`.patch`

If you edit many files in one patch, you can also copy the original
files using some consistent ending such as "`.orig`" before editing
them. Then, you can use "`gendiff`" (in the `rpm-build` package) to
create a patch with the differences.

Try to ensure that your patch match the context exactly. The default
"fuzz" value is "`0`", requiring matches to be exact. You can work
around this by adding "`%global _default_patch_fuzz 2`" to revert to the
value found in older versions of RPM in Fedora, but it is generally
recommended to avoid doing this.

As explained in Packaging/PatchUpstreamStatus, all patches should have a
comment above them in the SPEC file about their upstream status. This
should document the upstream bug/email that includes it (including the
date). If it is unique to Fedora, you should mention why it is unique.
The Fedora Project tries not to deviate from upstream; see
PackageMaintainers/WhyUpstream for the importance of this.

[[prep-section-unmodified-files]]
%prep section: Unmodified files
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sometimes, one or more of the Source files do not need to be
uncompressed. You can "prep" those into the build directory like this
(where `SOURCE1` refers to the relevant Source file):

`cp -p %SOURCE1 .`

[[build-section]]
%build section
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The "%build" section is sometimes complicated; here you configure and
compile/build the files to be installed.

Many programs follow the GNU `configure` approach (or some variation).
By default, they will install to a prefix of "`/usr/local`", which is
reasonable for unpackaged files. However, since you are packaging it,
change the prefix to "`/usr`". Libraries should be installed to either
`/usr/lib` or `/usr/lib64` depending on the architecture.

Since GNU `configure` is so common, the macro "`%configure`" can be used
to automatically invoke the correct options (e.g. change the prefix to
`/usr`). Some variation of this often works:

` %configure` +
` %make_build`

To override makefile variables, pass them as parameters to `make`:

` %make_build CFLAGS="%{optflags}" BINDIR=%{_bindir}`

More more information, see http://sourceware.org/autobook/["GNU
autoconf, automake, and libtool"] and
http://web.archive.org/web/20090411003817/http://www.suse.de/~sh/automake/automake.pdf["Open
Source Development Tools: An Introduction to Make, Configure, Automake,
Autoconf" by Stefan Hundhammer].

Some programs use `cmake`. See Packaging/cmake.

[[install-section]]
%install section
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This section involves script commands to "install" the program, copying
the relevant files from `%{_builddir}` to `%{buildroot}` (which usually
means from `~/rpmbuild/BUILD` to `~/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT`) and creating
directories inside `%{buildroot}` as necessary.

Some of the terminology can be misleading:

* The "build directory", also known as `%{_builddir}` is not the same as
the "build root", also known as `%{buildroot}`. Compilation occurs in
the former directory, while files to be packaged are copied from the
former to the latter.
* During the %build section, the current directory will start at
`%{buildsubdir}`, which is the subdirectory within `%{_builddir}` that
was created during %prep stage. This is usually something like
`~/rpmbuild/BUILD/%{name}-%{version}`.
* The %install section is *not* run when the binary RPM package is
installed by the end-user, but is only run when creating a package.

Normally, some variation of "`make install`" is performed here:

`%install` +
`%make_install`

Ideally you should use %make_install which is equivalent to
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/DESTDIR.html[`DESTDIR=%{buildroot}`]
if the program supports it, as it redirects file installations to the
specified directory and is exactly what we want to happen during the
%install section.

If the program does not support `DESTDIR` (and only if), you can
workaround it in one of several (inferior) ways:

* Patch the makefile so that is supports `DESTDIR`. Create directories
inside `DESTDIR` where necessary and submit the patch upstream.
* Use the "`%makeinstall`" macro. This method might work, but can lead
to subtle failures. It expands to something like
"`make prefix=%{buildroot}%{_prefix} bindir=%{buildroot}%{_bindir} ... install`",
which can result in some programs failing to work properly. Create
directories inside `%{buildroot}` where necessary.
* Consider using the `auto-destdir` package. This requires
"`BuildRequires: auto-destdir`", and changing "`make install`" to
"`make-redir DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install`". This only works well if the
installation uses only certain common commands to install files, like
`cp` and `install`.
* Perform the installation by hand. This would involve creating the
necessary directories under `%{buildroot}` and copying files from
`%{_builddir}` to `%{buildroot}`. Be especially careful with updates,
which often contain new or changed filenames. An example of this
procedure:

`%install` +
`mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/` +
`cp -p mycommand %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/`

[[check-section]]
%check section
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If self-tests are available, it is generally a good idea to include
them. They should be placed in the %check section (which immediately
follows the %install section, since files in %buildroot may be tested)
instead of within the %build section itself, so that they can be easily
skipped when necessary.

Often, this section contains:

`make test`

Sometimes it can be:

`make check`

Please explore the Makefile and choose the appropriate way.

[[files-section]]
%files section
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This section declares which files and directories are owned by the
package, and thus which files and directories will be placed into the
binary RPM.

[[files-basics]]
%files basics
+++++++++++++

The `%defattr` sets the default file permissions, and is often found at
the start of the `%files` section. Note that this is no longer necessary
unless the permissions need to be altered. The format of this is:

`%defattr(``, ``, ``, ``)`

The fourth parameter is often omitted. Usually one uses
`%defattr(-,root,root,-)`, where "`-`" uses the default permissions.

You should then list all the files and directories to be owned by the
package. Use macros for directory names where possible, which can be
viewed at Packaging:RPMMacros (e.g. use `%{_bindir}/mycommand` instead
of `/usr/bin/mycommand`). If the pattern begins with a "`/`" (or when
expanded from the macro) then it is taken from the `%{buildroot}`
directory. Otherwise, the file is presumed to be in the current
directory (e.g. inside `%{_builddir}`, such as documentation files that
you wish to include). If your package only installs a single file
`/usr/sbin/mycommand`, then the `%files` section can simply be:

`%files` +
`%{_sbindir}/mycommand`

To make your package less sensitive to upstream changes, declare all
files within a directory to be owned by the package with a pattern
match:

`%{_bindir}/*`

To include a single directory:

`%{_datadir}/%{name}/`

Note that `%{_bindir}/*` does not claim that this package owns the
`/usr/bin` directory, but only the files contained within. If you list a
directory, then you are claiming that the package owns that directory
and all files and subdirectories contained within. Thus, do *not* list
`%{_bindir}` and be careful of directories that may be shared with other
packages.

An error will occur if:

* a pattern match does not match any file or directory
* a file or directory is listed or matched more than once
* a file or directory in the `%{buildroot}` has not been listed

It is also possible to exclude files from a previous match by using the
`%exclude` glob. This can be useful for including almost all of the
files included by a different pattern match, but note that it will also
fail if it does not match anything.

[[files-prefixes]]
%files prefixes
+++++++++++++++

You may need to add one or more prefixes to lines in the `%files`
section; seperate them with a space. See
http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-files-list-directives.html[Max
RPM section on %files directives].

Usually, "`%doc`" is used to list documentation files within
`%{_builddir}` that were not copied to `%{buildroot}`. A `README` and
`INSTALL` file is usually included. They will be placed in an
appropriate directory under `/usr/share/doc`, whose ownership does not
need to be declared.

*Note:* If specifying a `%doc` entry, rpmbuild < 4.9.1 removes the doc
directory it installs files into before installing them. This means that
files already in it, for example installed in the `%install` section,
are removed and do not end up in the package. If you want to install
some files in the `%install` section, install them into a temporary
staging directory inside the build dir (not build root), for example
`_docs_staging`, and include them in the in the `%files` list like
`%doc _docs_staging/*`.

Configuration files should be placed in `/etc` and are normally
specified like this (which makes sure user changes aren't overwritten on
update):

`%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/foo.conf`

If the update uses a non-backwards-compatible configuration format, then
specify them like this:

`%config %{_sysconfdir}/foo.conf`

"`%attr(mode, user, group)`" can be used for finer control over
permissions, where a "`-`" means use the default:

`%attr(0600, root, root) FOO.BAR`

If a file is in particular natural language, use `%lang` to note that:

`%lang(de) %{_datadir}/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/tcsh*`

Programs using Locale files should follow the
Packaging:Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files[recommended method of
handling i18n files]:

* find the filenames in the `%install` step: `%find_lang ${name}`
* add the required build dependencies: `BuildRequires: gettext`
* use the found filenames: `%files -f ${name}.lang`

The `%readme` prefix is *not* valid in Fedora.

[[files-and-filesystem-hierarchy-standard-fhs]]
%files and Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You should follow the http://www.pathname.com/fhs/[Filesystem Hierarchy
Standard (FHS)]. Executables go in `/usr/bin`, global configuration
files go in `/etc`, libraries go into `/usr/lib` (or `/usr/lib64`) and
so on. Executables that should not normally be executed directly by
users or administrators should (but are executed by other parts of your
package) go in a subdirectory of `/usr/libexec`, which is referred to as
`%{_libexecdir}/%{name}`.

Do *not* install files into `/opt` or `/usr/local`.
(Packaging:Guidelines#Limited_usage_of_.2Fopt.2C_.2Fetc.2Fopt.2C_and_.2Fvar.2Fopt[reference])

Unfortunately, many programs do not follow the FHS by default. In
particular, architecture-independent libraries get placed in `/usr/lib`
instead of `/usr/share`. The former is for architecture-dependent
libraries, while the latter is for architecture-independent libraries,
which means that systems with different CPU architectures can share
`/usr/share`. There are many exceptions in Fedora (such as Python, Perl
and Systemd), but Fedora applies this rule more strictly than some
distributions. `rpmlint` will generally complain if you put anything
other than ELF files into `/usr/lib`.

[[files-example]]
%files example
++++++++++++++

Here's a simple example of a %files section:

`%files` +
`%doc README` +
`%license LICENSE COPYING` +
`%{_bindir}/*` +
`%{_sbindir}/*` +
`%{_datadir}/%{name}/` +
`%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/*.conf`

[[finding-duplicates]]
Finding duplicates
++++++++++++++++++

You can list any duplicates of two binary packages by doing:

`cd ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/ARCH # Substitute "ARCH" for your architecture` +
`rpm -qlp PACKAGE1.*.rpm | sort > ,1` +
`rpm -qlp PACKAGE2.*.rpm | sort > ,2` +
`comm -12 ,1 ,2`

[[scriptlets]]
Scriptlets
^^^^^^^^^^

When an end-user installs the RPM, you may want some commands to be run.
This can be achieved through scriptlets. See Packaging:Scriptlets.

Scriptlets can be run:

* before (*`%pre`*) or after (*`%post`*) a package is installed
* before (*`%preun`*) or after (*`%postun`*) a package is uninstalled
* at the start (*`%pretrans`*) or end (*`%posttrans`*) of a transaction

For example, every binary RPM package that stores shared library files
in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call `ldconfig` in
`%post` and `%postun`. If the package has multiple subpackages with
libraries, each subpackage should also perform the same actions.

`%post -p /sbin/ldconfig` +
`%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig`

If only running a single command, then the "`-p`" option runs the
adjacent command without invoking the shell. However, for several
commands, omit this option and include the shell commands beneath.

If you run any programs within the scriptlets, then you must specify any
requirements in the form "`Requires(CONTEXT)`" (e.g. `Requires(post)`).

`%pre`, `%post`, `%preun`, and `%postun` provide the argument `$1`,
which is the number of packages of this name which will be left on the
system when the action completes. Don't compare for equality with `2`,
but instead check if they are greater than or equal to `2`. For
`%pretrans` and `%posttrans`, `$1` is always `0`.

For example, if the package installs an info manual, then the info
manual index must be updated with `install-info` from the `info`
package. Firstly, there is no guarantee that the `info` package will be
available unless we explicitly declare it as required, and secondly, we
don't want to fail completely if `install-info` fails:

`Requires(post): info` +
`Requires(preun): info` +
`...` +
`%post` +
`/sbin/install-info %{_infodir}/%{name}.info %{_infodir}/dir || :` +
`%preun` +
`if [ $1 = 0 ] ; then` +
`/sbin/install-info --delete %{_infodir}/%{name}.info %{_infodir}/dir || :` +
`fi`

There is one other glitch related to installing info manuals. The
`install-info` command will update the info directory, so we should
delete the useless empty directory from the %\{buildroot} during the
`%install` section:

`rm -f %{buildroot}%{_infodir}/dir`

Another scriptlet-like ability are "triggers", which can be run for your
package when other packages are installed or uninstalled. See
http://ftp.rpm.org/api/4.4.2.2/triggers.html[RPM Triggers].

[[macros]]
Macros
^^^^^^

Macros are text in the format `%{string}`. Typical macros:

[cols=",,",options="header",]
|=======================================================================
|Macro |Typical Expansion |Meaning
|`%{_bindir}` |`/usr/bin` |Binary directory: where executables are
usually stored.

|`%{_builddir}` |`~/rpmbuild/BUILD` |Build directory: files are compiled
within a subdirectory of the build directory. See `%buildsubdir`.

|`%{buildroot}` |`~/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/%{name}...` |Build root: where
files are "installed" during the `%install` stage, which copies files
from a subdirectory of `%{_builddir}` to a subdirectory of
`%{buildroot}`. (Historically, `%{buildroot}` was in "/var/tmp/".)

|`%{buildsubdir}` |`%{_builddir}/%{name}` |Build subdirectory: a
subdirectory within `%{_builddir}` where files are compiled during the
`%build` stage. It is set after `%autosetup`.

|`%{_datadir}` |`/usr/share` |Share directory.

|`%{_defaultdocdir}` |`/usr/share/doc` |Default documentation directory.

|`%{dist}` |`.fc`__`NUMBER`__ |Distribution+version short name (e.g.
"`.fc`")

|`%{fedora}` |_`NUMBER`_ |Number of fedora release (e.g. "")

|`%{_includedir}` |`/usr/include`

|`%{_infodir}` |`/usr/share/info`

|`%{_initrddir}` |`/etc/rc.d/init.d`

|`%{_libdir}` |`/usr/lib`

|`%{_libexecdir}` |`/usr/libexec`

|`%{_localstatedir}` |`/var`

|`%{_mandir}` |`/usr/share/man`

|`%{name}` | |Name of package, set by Name: tag

|`%{_sbindir}` |`/usr/sbin`

|`%{_sharedstatedir}` |`/var/lib`

|`%{_sysconfdir}` |`/etc`

|`%{version}` | |Version of package, set by Version: tag
|=======================================================================

Learn more about macros by looking in `/etc/rpm/*` and `/usr/lib/rpm`,
especially `/usr/lib/rpm/macros`. Also use `rpm --showrc` to show values
that RPM will use for macros (altered by `rpmrc` and macro configuration
files).

You can set your own macro values using %global, but be sure to define
them before you use them. (Macro definitions can also refer to other
macros.) For example:

`%global date 2012-02-08`

Use the "`-E`" option of `rpmbuild` to find the value of a macro in a
SPEC file:

`rpmbuild -E '%{_bindir}' myfile.spec`

Also see Packaging/RPMMacros and
https://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch09s07.html[RPM
Guide chapter 9].

[[other-tags]]
Other tags
^^^^^^^^^^

In addition to Requires and BuildRequires tags, you can also use these
for controlling dependencies:

* *Provides*: list virtual package names that this package provides. For
example, there might be a package "`foo`" that demands a particular
functionality "bar" from another program. If there are several packages
that can satisfy that demand, those packages can specify
"`Provides: bar`" and the "`foo`" package can specify "`Requires: bar`".
You could also use the
http://dailypackage.fedorabook.com/index.php?/archives/6-Wednesday-Why-The-Alternatives-System.html["alternatives"
system], but avoid if multiple users on the same system might want
different default, as these settings are system-wide. Use
"`rpm -q --provides PACKAGENAME`" to see what a given package provides.
Some examples of virtual packages in Fedora:
** MTA: Used for mail transport agents, such as sendmail.
** tex(latex): Used for latex
* *Obsoletes*: remove another named package(s) when this package is
installed. Use when the package name changes or when it totally replaces
a different package.
* *Conflicts*: state what other packages cannot be installed
simultaneously to this one. Avoid this if you can. See
Packaging/Conflicts.
* *BuildConflicts*: state what packages cannot be installed when
building this package. Avoid this if you can.

To manage different architectures, there are two tags:

* *ExcludeArch*: to exclude an architecture on which the package doesn't
build. For example:

`ExcludeArch: ppc`

* *ExclusiveArch*: to include only the specified architecture. Avoid
this unless absolutely correct.

Valid architectures are listed at Architectures.

[[subpackages]]
Subpackages
^^^^^^^^^^^

A SPEC file can define several binary package. In other words, one SRPM
with one SPEC file can result in several RPMS. Note that there is still
only one creation (%prep, %build, %install etc.) process. `name-doc` and
`name-devel` subpackages are common for documentation and development
files respectively.

Use the `%package` directive to start defining a subpackage:

`%package subpackage_name`

After each `%package` directive, list the tags for the subpackage. This
should at least include the Summary and Group tags, as well as the
`%description subpackage_name` and `%files subpackage_name` directives:

Anything not specified by the subpackage will be inherited from its
parent.

By default, if the package name is "`foo`" and the subpackage name is
"`bar`", then the resulting subpackage will be "`foo-bar`". You can
override it with the "`-n`" option (but you'll need to use it in all
other directives too if you specify it here):

`%package -n new_subpackage_name`

http://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch10s04.html[See
the RPM Guide section on subpackages] for more information.

[[conditionals]]
Conditionals
^^^^^^^^^^^^

You can insert conditional statements, for example to test if you are
creating a binary for a certain architecture:

`%ifarch ARCHITECTURE_NAME`

the negated version with:

`%ifnarch ARCHITECTURE_NAME`

or the more general conditional:

`%if TRUE_OR_FALSE`

There is an optional "`%else`" section; all of these are closed with
"`%endif`".

[[application-specific-guidelines]]
Application Specific Guidelines
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There are many application-specific guidelines that can help you (e.g.,
for specific programming languages, applications, libraries, and build
systems). Many of them are listed as part of the
link:Packaging/Guidelines#Application_Specific_Guidelines[Application
Specific Guidelines of Packaging/Guidelines]. Examples of
application-specific guidelines are those for:

* Packaging:Cmake[Cmake]
* Packaging:Emacs[Emacs]

Failing that, some other ways of finding application-specific help are:

* The 'SEARCH' command on Fedoraproject.org.
* PackagingDrafts
* A link:SIGs[Special Interest Group (SIG)]
* Special:PrefixIndex/Packaging[Wiki pages prefixed with 'Packaging']

[[miscellaneous-hints]]
Miscellaneous hints
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Packaging/FrequentlyMadeMistakes has information on frequently-made
mistakes. There are also some recommendations and controversial tricks
on link:PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks[PackageMaintainers/Packaging
Tricks].

Try to write your SPEC files so that it is likely to work when a new
release is made upstream, without any changes aside from bumping the
version number and refreshing the source files. For example, if it
contains *.txt files with execute bits, instead of doing

` chmod a-x Filename1.txt Filename2.txt Filename3.txt`

consider doing this, which will handle new filenames that use the same
file naming convention:

` chmod a-x *.txt`

If you want to see lots of examples of scriptlets, you can show all the
scriptlets on installed programs using:

` rpm -qa --queryformat "\n\nPACKAGE: %{name}\n" --scripts | less`

Don't try to interact with the user; RPM is designed to support batch
installs. If an application needs to show a EULA, that needs to be part
of its initial execution, not its installation.

You might not want to start services, because in a big install that
could slow things down. If you install an init or systemd script,
consider using `chkconfig` or `systemctl` to arrange for the service to
be started/stopped on the next reboot. Before uninstalling, you should
normally try to stop its services if they are running.

Uninstalling should reverse most changes made during installation, but
don't remove any user-created files.

Normally, if there are binary executables, then debugging symbols are
stripped from the normal binary packages and placed into a `name-debug`
subpackage. If this shouldn't happen, you can disable the stripping and
creation of this subpackage by putting this at the top of your SPEC:

`%global _enable_debug_package 0` +
`%global debug_package %{nil}` +
`%global __os_install_post /usr/lib/rpm/brp-compress %{nil}`

To prevent stripping you may also need to do this in the `%install`
section:

`export DONT_STRIP=1`

A way to check for the version of Fedora in a SPEC file for conditional
builds is:

`%if 0%{?fedora} <= `

The `?` causes the macro to evaluate to evaluate to blank if `%fedora`
is not defined. This causes the end result to be the `0` (which is a
number and thus fine), while not interfering with the result if there is
actually a value for `%fedora`. (Note that this trick does not work in
Koji "scratch" builds, where `%fedora` is set during the creation of a
SRPM.)

GUI programs must have a desktop entry so that people can invoke it from
the graphical desktop menu. For `.desktop` files, see
link:Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files[Fedora packaging guidelines for
desktop files] and
http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/[desktop
entry spec]. For icons within `/usr/share/icons`, see
http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html[icon
theme spec].

[[building-the-binary-package]]
Building the binary package
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[[test-with-rpmlint]]
Test with rpmlint
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

To catch many common errors early, run `rpmlint` on your SPEC file
before trying to build anything from it:

`$ rpmlint program.spec`

If the reported error doesn't make sense, run it again with the "`-i`"
option for longer messages.

Aim to have no errors, but sometimes `rpmlint` reports false positives.
The link:Packaging/Guidelines#Use_rpmlint[Fedora packaging guidelines]
explains which ones to ignore.

[[create-binary-rpms-from-the-spec-file]]
Create binary RPMS from the SPEC file
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Once you've created your SPEC file, build the SRPM and binary RPMS by
running this:

`$ rpmbuild -ba program.spec`

If successful, RPMS will be created within `~/rpmbuild/RPMS` and SRPMS
will be created within `~/rpmbuild/SRPMS`.

If it fails, go to the appropriate directory and see what is left over.
To help debug, you can skip earlier stages that succeeded with the
"`--short-circuit`" option. For example, to restart at the `%install`
stage (skipping earlier stages), do this:

`$ rpmbuild -bi --short-circuit program.spec`

If you just want to create an SRPM (which does not run the `%prep` or
`%build` or other stages), run this:

`rpmbuild -bs program.spec`

[[testing-binary-rpms-with-rpmlint]]
Testing binary RPMS with rpmlint
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

`rpmlint` can be run on SPEC files, RPMS and SRPMS to check for errors.
You need to eliminate or justify warnings before posting a package.
link:Common_Rpmlint_issues[This page] offers explanations for some of
the common issues that come up. If you are in the SPECS directory, do
this:

`$ rpmlint `__`NAME`__`.spec ../RPMS/*/`__`NAME`__`*.rpm ../SRPMS/`__`NAME`__`*.rpm`

Enter the `~/rpmbuild/RPMS` directory and into the architecture
subdirectory. You will find some binary RPMS. Quickly see their files
and permissions (to check whether they are correct) by doing:

`$ rpmls *.rpm`

If they look fine, install them as root:

`# rpm -ivp package1.rpm package2.rpm package3.rpm ...`

Test the programs in a few different ways to see if everything works
correctly. If it is a GUI tool, make sure it shows up in the desktop
menu, otherwise the `.desktop` entry is wrong.

Uninstall packages later by doing:

`# rpm -e package1 package2 package3`

[[mock-and-koji]]
Mock and Koji
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

link:Projects/Mock[Mock] is a powerful tool that uses the SRPM you have
created to build binary packages within a nearly empty environment. This
can reveal if you have accurate build dependencies. If it fails, then
you forgot to list something in BuildRequires. See
link:Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds[Using Mock to test package
builds]. Once your account is a member of the "`mock`" group, you can
run commands like this to do local testing:

`$ mock -r fedora-23-i386 rebuild path_to_source_RPM`

You can use Koji (which uses `mock`) to do builds on many different
systems, some of which you may not have. PackageMaintainers/Join and
PackageMaintainers/UsingKoji have more information about Koji. Once it's
set up, you can test your SRPM on a variety of platforms by running
commands like:

`$ koji build --scratch f23 path_to_source_RPM`

Replace `f23` with any later release of Fedora, or `rawhide`.

Your Koji builds can only depend on packages that are actually in the
TARGET distribution repository. Thus, you can't use Koji to build for
released distributions if your package depends on other new packages
that Bodhi hasn't released yet. If you need to build against a package
that is not yet a stable released update, submit a Koji buildroot
override request via Bodhi. If it's not your own package you depend on,
contact its maintainer(s). [Before Bodhi could handle Koji buildroot
override requests, the old method has been to file a ticket with rel-eng
at: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/newticket and request that that
package be added as a buildroot override.]

[[helpful-tools]]
Helpful tools
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The `rpmdevtools` package has a number of helpful tools;
"`rpm -qil rpmdevtools`" will show you what it installs.

* `rpmdev-bumpspec` : bump the release tag in the spec file and add a
changelog comment with the right date and version format:

`rpmdev-bumpspec --comment=COMMENT --userstring=NAME+EMAIL_STRING SPECFILES`

DNF download plugin (from core DNF plugins) is also useful:

* `dnf download` : download the SRPM of the package by running:

`dnf download --source PACKAGENAME`

The `auto-buildrequires` package has a pair of nice tools for helping to
figure out the proper BuildRequires entries. After installing this
package, replace "`rpmbuild`" with "`auto-br-rpmbuild`" and you'll see
an automatically generated BuildRequires list.

You might find http://rust.sourceforge.net/[RUST] useful (GPL), though
it does not create SPEC files of suitable quality for Fedora packages.
http://kitenet.net/~joey/code/alien/[Alien] converts between package
formats. It won't produce clean SRPMS, but converting an existing
package might provide helpful information.

If you are thinking about packing your rpm for Fedora, be sure you run
your packages through https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/[Fedora
Review], which helps ensure that you comply to the
Packaging:Guidelines[Packaging Guidelines].

Finally,
https://github.com/alanfranz/docker-rpm-builder[docker-rpm-builder] (APL
2.0) uses http://www.docker.com[Docker] to build RPM packages; while
using rpmbuild requires building on the same host distro as the target,
and mock works fine on Fedora/Centos/RHEL distributions for any target,
*this last tool works fine whenever Docker can run*.

If you want to build your package for diferent distribution and
architectures and to have publicly accesible dnf repository, you can
submit your src.rpm to https://copr.fedoraproject.org[Copr].

If you need to sign your new package, use `rpmsign` tool from `rpm-sign`
package.

[[guidelines-and-rules]]
Guidelines and rules
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When you create your packages, you'll need to follow the following rules
and guidelines:

* link:Join_the_package_collection_maintainers[How to join the Fedora
Package Collection Maintainers]
* Packaging:Guidelines[Packaging Guidelines]
* Packaging:NamingGuidelines[Package Naming Guidelines]
* Packaging:LicensingGuidelines[Package Licensing Guidelines]
* Packaging:DistTag[Dist Tag Guidelines]
* Packaging:ReviewGuidelines[Package Review Guidelines]

There are many official guidelines that will help you with specific
circumstances (e.g. Java programs, OCaml programs, GNOME programs). You
can also learn more from the SIGs and
:Category:Package_Maintainers[Package Maintainers] sections.

Special:Prefixindex/Packaging[You can also see the list of all Wiki
pages about Packaging] to see if any apply.

Failing that, you might find some useful recommendations in the
unofficial :Category:Packaging_guidelines_drafts[draft guidelines
category] and link:PackagingDrafts[Packaging Drafts To Do].

You might find ideas from http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging[SuSE],
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/[Debian], but
http://www.mail-archive.com/distributions@lists.freedesktop.org/msg00156.html[distributions
differ in their rules], so do not presume they can be used directly.

*The .spec files that you create must be open source software, as noted
in the Legal:Fedora_Project_Contributor_Agreement[FPCA].*

[[maintaining-the-package]]
Maintaining the package
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Once your package has been accepted, you and your co-maintainers will
need to maintain it. See link:Package_update_HOWTO[Package update HOWTO]
and link:Package_update_guidelines[Package update guidelines]. If you
update the version in multiple releases of Fedora, do it backwards in
time (e.g. release for Fedora N, then once that's accepted, Fedora N-1).
The system presumes that later versions of Fedora have the same or later
versions of programs.

Encourage the upstream developers to use standard source code release
conventions. Using standard conventions makes packaging much easier. For
more information, see:

* http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/releasing-floss-software.html[Releasing
Free/Libre/Open Source Software (FLOSS) for Source Installation] (a
quick summary)
* http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Managing-Releases.html[GNU
Coding Standards release process]
* http://en.tldp.org/HOWTO/Software-Release-Practice-HOWTO/[Software
Release Practice HOWTO]
* http://www.pathname.com/fhs/[Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS)]
* http://offog.org/articles/packaging/[Packaging Unix software]

[[for-more-information]]
For more information
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The :Category:Package_Maintainers[Package Maintainers] page links to
many other useful pages, and the link:Package_update_HOWTO[Package
update HOWTO] describes how to update an existing package you already
maintain in Fedora.

For more information, outside of the Fedora Wiki, see:

* https://developer.fedoraproject.org/deployment/rpm/about.html[A brief
RPM Packaging overview] on the Fedora Developer Portal
* http://www.g-loaded.eu/2006/04/05/how-to-build-rpm-packages-on-fedora/[How
to build RPM packages on Fedora] - very brief run-through
* Packaging software with RPM (developerWorks)
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm1/[Part 1],
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm2/[Part 2], and
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-rpm3.html[Part 3]
* Fedora Classroom had an IRC session on packaging and you can refer to
the logs at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_RPM_packages_%2820090405%29

* http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/[Maximum RPM Book] - most complete
information, but in some cases old/obsolete
* http://docs-old.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch-creating-rpms.html[RPM
Guide, section on creating RPMs] - this has lots of good information,
and is slightly more up-to-date, but is a draft
* http://web.archive.org/web/20100109050207/http://docs.fedoraproject.org/developers-guide/ch-rpm-building.html[Developer's
guide, section on building RPMs] - via archive.org, disappeared in 2010

* http://freshrpms.net/docs/fight/["The fight", Mattias Saou's first
attempt to make a readable rpm package building introduction. ca. 2003]

* http://en.tldp.org/HOWTO/RPM-HOWTO/index.html[RPM HOWTO: RPM at Idle
by Donnie Barnes]

* http://en.opensuse.org/Build_Service/cross_distribution_package_how_to[Cross-distribution
package HOWTO] has hints if you're building one RPM for many
distributions.

* http://linuxshellaccount.blogspot.com/2008/03/creating-your-own-linux-rpms-initial.html[Creating
Your Own Linux RPM's - The Initial Software Build] is another brief
intro, but it makes the point that "The process of building RPM's is
much simpler than creating packages for Solaris... Fewer steps, and the
ability to add all of your software information into one specification
file, makes for a much tighter (and easier to modify or reproduce)
software packaging system."
* http://fedoranews.org/alex/tutorial/rpm/[All you need to know about
RPM] (more about installing packages than creating them)
* The http://wiki.rpm.org/[rpm.org Wiki] has some useful information,
such as the http://wiki.rpm.org/Problems[list of known RPM problems]

Note: The http://rpm5.org/[rpm5.org] site has some documentation, but do
not depend on it; that is the home of a _fork_ of RPM maintained by Jeff
Johnson. The RPM used by Fedora (and Novell/SuSE) is instead based at
http://www.rpm.org[rpm.org]. http://lwn.net/Articles/236029/[lwn.net has
a brief article] about this.

Category:Package_Maintainers[Category:Package Maintainers]
Category:How_to[Category:How to]
'''

See a typo, something missing or out of date, or anything else which can be
improved? Edit this document at https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/fedora-howto.
