Description of problem: The dtc package does not include libfdt. Could it, or could a separate libfdt package be created?
To be clear, you're looking for libfdt.a and the libfdt.h and fdt.h header files in a subpackage, correct? Could you offer a little rationale for providing libfdt.a as static libraries require and exception before they are allowed to be packaged per: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/StaticLibraryPolicy
A static library is not necessary, since I'm primarily concerned with qemu and that can use a shared library. (I don't expect that this library package will be used by freestanding environments, such as firmware or the kernel.)
A shared library needs an soname, so we'd want to fix that upstream. Then it would be perfectly reasonable to ship it.
So a way to do this is to create a Makefile something like this for libfdt: # Makefile.libfdt # # This is not a complete Makefile of itself. Instead, it is designed to # be easily embeddable into other systems of Makefiles. # LIBFDT_SRCS = fdt.c fdt_ro.c fdt_wip.c fdt_sw.c fdt_rw.c fdt_strerror.c LIBFDT_INCLUDES = fdt.h libfdt.h LIBFDT_EXTRA = libfdt_internal.h LIBFDT_LIB = libfdt/libfdt.a LIBFDT_SHARED_LIB=libfdt.so LIBFDT_OBJS = $(LIBFDT_SRCS:%.c=%.o) CFLAGS += -I . $(LIBFDT_objdir)/$(LIBFDT_LIB): $(addprefix $(LIBFDT_objdir)/,$(LIBFDT_OBJS)) $(LIBFDT_SHARED_LIB): $(LIBFDT_OBJS) $(CC) -shared -o $(LIBFDT_SHARED_LIB) $^ clean: rm -f $(LIBFDT_SHARED_LIB)
Changing version to '9' as part of upcoming Fedora 9 GA. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Is this held up waiting for an soname from the upstream dtc project?
(In reply to comment #6) > Is this held up waiting for an soname from the upstream dtc project? Mostly. I could just make the soname match the dtc version that libfdt is built from since it's being split out of there. However, we'd probably want a common scheme across the various distros, so having upstream do the sonaming would be best.
Are you going to contact the upstream project about this, or are you waiting for me to do it? I had mistakenly thought this package was ready to go for F10. :(
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 10 development cycle. Changing version to '10'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
(In reply to comment #8) > Are you going to contact the upstream project about this, or are you waiting > for me to do it? > > I had mistakenly thought this package was ready to go for F10. :( I worked with upstream and there are patches accepted now that create a libfdt shared library. I'll see if we can get a git snapshot into rawhide that installs these sometime this week.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 10 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 10. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '10'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 10's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 10 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 10 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-12-17. Fedora 10 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
(In reply to comment #10) > I worked with upstream and there are patches accepted now that create a libfdt > shared library. > > I'll see if we can get a git snapshot into rawhide that installs these sometime > this week. Do we want a dtc-libfdt subpackage?
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 13 development cycle. Changing version to '13'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Created attachment 493776 [details] patch to build libfdt and libfdt-devel packages Backport of the upstream patch on top of 1.2.0. I also fixed the installation (patch sent upstream) and included here the changes to the spec file. rpmlint results for new packages: libfdt.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://dtc.ozlabs.org/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> libfdt.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig libfdt.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig libfdt-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://dtc.ozlabs.org/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> libfdt-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3015609
Created attachment 493782 [details] correct patch This is the patch that I really used for the Koji build.
Comment on attachment 493782 [details] correct patch Ah, the patch was the same both times but Bugzilla is apparently removing "++" lines from libfdt-so.patch. Trying to remove the "patch" flag.
Created attachment 499125 [details] patch upgrading to upstream 1.3.0 This updated spec-only patch upgrades to upstream 1.3.0 and provides a new libfdt package.
Created attachment 502015 [details] upgrade to 1.3.0, fix FTBFS and provide a libfdt subpackage GCC 4.6 introduces a couple of errors due to -Wunused-but-set-variable. Disable -Werror until they are fixed.
I took the latest patch and adjusted it a bit by fixing the errors instead of disabling the -Werror. This build now has dtc 1.3.0 and the libfdt subpackages: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=250692 Thanks for the help!