Howdy fellow Fedorites :-)
I recently installed Fedora 13 on my system, and I'm still in the process of setting it up as I like.
As the FCEU and snes9x versions on rpmfusion are old (fceultra 0.98, snes without GUI), I wanted to compile my own RPMs
Everything went OK, but I found myself having to build the packages several times because of missing LDFLAGS.

I got several errors like "symbol X missing, it was found on Y so you may want to add Y to the linker flags", which I fixed by modifying & exporting LDFLAGS.

So, 2 questions:
1.- why are the LDFLAGS missing? How can I avoid having to set them up manually?
2.- There should be a way to avoid re-compiling the source and only run the rpm packaging stuff with the already built things (some option like 'don't build, only package'). how can I do that?


BTW, I can share my (pretty much hacked) .spec files if you are interested


Regards

Have you tried contacting maintainers of those packages? They might know reasons, and/or do it for you maybe.

Thanks for your reply, but that's not required. I did build the packages succesfully, I just wanted to know if there is a way to spend less time building my RPMs in the future.
It seems FCEUX is not packaged due to issues in the way the LUA library is used, and snes9x is packaged without a GUI just because the GUI used to be a fork and only in the latest version it is integrated in the official package.

Being a Slackware user I'm used to compile my own packages. Never had an issue like this before, that's why I point (maybe incorrectly) to the RPM creation process instead of the build itself. But I reused the .spec files from the rpmfusion repo (modifying them as required of course) so I also believe maybe I need to set up something else in my environment.

I used to recompile a lot of srpms from Fedora to CentOS and I understand all the problems more then well. I would spend hours recompiling the bunch of dependencies only to find that one of the deep under requires newer system package that would endanger the stability of system it self, then I would lower the version used and tried again.

1 members found this post helpful.

Well, I have just started using Fedora a few days back, so I still have not faced that problem. :-)

So, in your experience, is there any way to avoid having to rebuild the sources? there must be something 'tweakable' in the .spec file for that!

Every creation of rpm forces the compilation of sources, so if anything is changed it will be in rpm as it should be. What rpm does is watch what "make install" would do and use those file in binary rpm.

Run to see what options you want (-ba to -bs) to use. But it is better to use .spec file to set everything up once, and be reused times and times again. Here is excellent site for rpm's: http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/ . Everything you would do manually better add to chapters (like postinstall or preinstall, etc..).

yes and no. Yes, because if something changes in the source, there should be a rebuild.
But mainly no as sometimes you can even change something that does not require all the source files to be rebuilt, so at least some of the already built pieces can be reused. Also, if the compilation is successful and my spec file fails in the packaging step, doing a full rebuild is a waste of time.
I understood that part, src2pkg and the slackbuilds do the same thing in Slackware :-)

Tips are always welcome, and thanks for the link :-) I have read something about --short-circuit but haven't found yet a good description of how to use it, I think that option is (at least partially) what I'm looking for


Regards.

I am not writing about what and how it SHOULD be, but what happens when you run .

I think I misunderstood the part. Sorry for that, reading it again I realized what you meant. :-)