MinGW, CMake and project layout

[squimrel]

I'm pretty unsure about the MinGW package name in other words this needs review.

[bcl]

I don't have any interesting in making this MinGW compatible. The changes are too extensive for something that won't be used (tested) by the majority of the users so it'll end up rotting.

[squimrel]

I need this for the Fedora Media Writer because it should work on Windows. I don't know who else is a user of isomd5sum apart from people using the command-line tool I can't find any projects that use it.

I could have also changed the Makefile (less changes) but doing it properly using CMake seemed cleaner in the long run.
Also it's supposed to make packaging easier and especially take away the work from you to package for mingw that's why there're so many changes.

[bcl]

Why does media writer need it? Is it going to be doing a pre-check of the embedded checksums instead of (or in addition to) the SHA of the iso?

[squimrel]

It does an SHA-256 check after download.
Then it might modify the iso image and therefore re-implant the checksum.
To ensure that nothing went wrong when writing to disk it's doing an isomd5sum check and then after it modified the partition table it updates the isomd5sum.
So it needs both check and implant.

[bcl]

Then it might modify the iso image and therefore re-implant the checksum.

Ah, ok! Thanks for the explanation.

[bcl]

I think my biggest concern with this now is the .spec.in stuff. The spec file shouldn't really be in the upstream project, and it certainly shouldn't be running fedpkg commands from there.

We should also call this 1.3.0 instead of 1.2.2 (I'm going to do a build of current master as 1.2.2).

[bcl]

This shouldn't be needed if you can pass the include path to it from cmake

[squimrel]

Well, do I want to tell CMake to search in ./include/? I simply like being explicit about things.

[bcl]

Yes, telling cmake about ./include/ is the right way to do it.

[squimrel]

@bcl Okay I removed all the packaging stuff from the PR. I'll leave that to the packager then.

[bcl]

I think there's a couple other things to add/figure out:

• version number -- you have it pulling from the git tag, but that doesn't help if someone has a bare archive of the code. It used to be in the Makefile and tagged from that.
• Creating an archive -- There should be a make target for this like there used to be: https://github.com/rhinstaller/isomd5sum/blob/master/Makefile#L72
• Add ./build/ to .gitignore
• Add a section to the README.md on how to create a new release.

Thanks!

[squimrel]

Sorry for the late response. I addressed your last comment. But AFAIK you can not add custom rules to the Makefile that cmake creates so instead I added a script which creates that archive at scripts/create-archive.

[bcl]

Thanks for the updated patches, but I'm going to have to nak these changes. I've spend the afternoon trying to get it working with an updated fedora spec file and I keep hitting problems. It just introduces too much change for my taste.