[Bug 252010] Review Request: rpmrebuild - A tool to build rpm file from rpm database
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Sep 27 14:57:28 UTC 2007
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: rpmrebuild - A tool to build rpm file from rpm database
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252010
anderson.silva at redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED
Flag|needinfo?(anderson.silva at red|
|hat.com) |
------- Additional Comments From anderson.silva at redhat.com 2007-09-27 10:57 EST -------
Alright guys... I finally got a few minutes to address some of the issues
discussed above. First, let me thank everyone for helping me out with this.
Here are the updated spec/src:
http://www.the-silvas.com/rpmrebuild.spec
http://www.the-silvas.com/rpmrebuild-2.1.1-7.src.rpm
What I have fixed:
* Thu Sep 27 2007 Anderson Silva <ansilva at redhat.com> 2.1.1-7
- Changed /etc to %%{_sysconfdir}
- Fixed reference on postun section
- Using tarball as Source0
- Added require rpm-build
- Removed require for textutils, fileutils
- Added directories to belong to package
I still have 2 questions/comments:
1. About Comment #19:
'You probably should check for presence of %{_sysconfir}/popt before sed'ing,
because it might not be present (user could have deleted it).'
There is a if statement that checks to see if the file exists before running the
sed.
2. About Comment #16:
'* %_libdir vs noarch
- This package is marked as noarch, however %files list use
%_libdir, which differs between on 32bit arch and on 64bit arch'
OK, this is one problem that I am not sure how to solve. What do you guys
suggest? Should I contact upstream and ask them to change their project to lay
out their shell scripts somewhere else in the system? Which location what that
be outside /usr/lib?
I think they put it there, because the rpm package layout their stuff there too.
Should I make this rpm i386 only? even though in theory it should work on 64bit
arch?
I am open to suggestions.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list