Bug 1255701

Summary: USE_64 variable is not used by upstream
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Marcin Juszkiewicz <mjuszkie>
Component: 389-adminAssignee: Noriko Hosoi <nhosoi>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 24CC: mreynolds, nhosoi, nkinder, rmeggins
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Cause: Outdated flag was present in spec file Consequence: A variable is set that is not used Fix: Remove the variable Result: The spec file does not contain an unneeded variable
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-06 00:25:58 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 922257    
Attachments:
Description Flags
spec change none

Description Marcin Juszkiewicz 2015-08-21 11:20:37 UTC
Created attachment 1065550 [details]
spec change

Description of problem:

I am going through all Fedora packages to check how they treat aarch64 architecture. 389-admin has ifarch check for some of 64-bit architectures and then sets USE_64 variable.

Upstream source does not contain USE_64 use - probably it got dropped like it was with 389-ds-base case.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

1.1.42-1

AArch64 build works with and without USE_64 being set.

Comment 1 Marcin Juszkiewicz 2016-01-19 12:48:24 UTC
ping?

Comment 2 Noriko Hosoi 2016-01-21 21:12:37 UTC
(In reply to Marcin Juszkiewicz from comment #1)
> ping?

Thank you for providing the patch, Marcin.  We are taking care of this issue in the next RHDS release.

Comment 3 Jan Kurik 2016-02-24 13:39:12 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 24 development cycle.
Changing version to '24'.

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/HouseKeeping/Fedora24#Rawhide_Rebase

Comment 4 mreynolds 2016-07-06 15:18:42 UTC
Fixed upstream, thanks Marcin for submitting the patch!

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2016-11-03 20:44:53 UTC
389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8660c7656f

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2016-11-03 21:17:23 UTC
389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8f9d466bcc

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2016-11-05 03:34:33 UTC
389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8660c7656f

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2016-11-05 18:59:33 UTC
389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8f9d466bcc

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2016-11-06 00:25:58 UTC
389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2016-11-19 21:10:41 UTC
389-ds-base-1.3.5.15-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.