Bug 395551

Summary:	evolution-data-server.spec uses a patch provided by evolution's SRPM
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Paul Bolle <pebolle>
Component:	evolution-data-server	Assignee:	Matthew Barnes <mbarnes>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	8	CC:	mcepl, mcrha
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2008-01-17 17:31:54 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Paul Bolle 2007-11-22 11:19:21 UTC

Description of problem:
The evolution-data-server specfile has a Patch entry for a patch included in
evolution's SRPM.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
evolution-data-server-1.12.1-2.fc8

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. rpmbuild evolution-data-server.spec 
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
error: File [...]/SOURCES/evolution-1.4.4-ldap-x86_64-hack.patch: No such file
or directory

Expected results:
No error.

Additional info:
My guess is this (seemingly trivial) patch needs to be included in
evolution-data-server's SRPM too (using a different name, to avoid clashes with
the same patch for evolution).

Comment 1 Matthew Barnes 2007-11-22 14:34:16 UTC

Actually the same patch _is_ included in both the Evolution and E-D-S SRPMs.  It
dates back to a time before E-D-S existed, then presumably was copied to the
E-D-S package when it was created.

The patches are identical down to the line number.  I can rename the E-D-S patch
if necessary, although I think our own build system would have caught this if it
were really a problem.

I think the patch may have somehow been deleted from your SOURCES directory. 
Can you please retest?

Comment 2 Matěj Cepl 2008-01-17 14:27:12 UTC

Reporter, could you please reply to the previous question? If you won't reply in
one month, I will have to close this bug as INSUFFICIENT_DATA. Thank you.

Comment 3 Paul Bolle 2008-01-17 15:38:00 UTC

Comment #1 is correct:
    $ rpm -qpl evolution-data-server-1.12.1-2.fc8.src.rpm | grep hack
    evolution-1.4.4-ldap-x86_64-hack.patch

    $ diff -us <(rpm2cpio evolution-2.12.1-3.fc8.src.rpm | cpio -i --quiet
--to-stdout evolution-1.4.4-ldap-x86_64-hack.patch) \
    <(rpm2cpio evolution-data-server-1.12.1-2.fc8.src.rpm | cpio -i --quiet
--to-stdout evolution-1.4.4-ldap-x86_64-hack.patch)
    Files /dev/fd/63 and /dev/fd/62 are identical

I've probably first installed evolution-2.12.1-3.fc8.src.rpm, installed
evolution-data-server-1.12.1-2.fc8.src.rpm after that end than did "rpmbuild
--rmsource" on evolution's specfile. 

You might indeed rename the E-D-S patch. However, that seems only useful for
people that use one SOURCES directory for multiple packages. That is what I do,
because until now I never ran into name clashes with the odd packages I've
(re)built.

Comment 4 Matthew Barnes 2008-01-17 15:52:59 UTC

The patches are bound to diverge sooner or later so I'll rename the e-d-s patch.

Comment 5 Matthew Barnes 2008-01-17 17:31:54 UTC

Renamed the ldap-x86_64-hack patch in evolution-data-server-2.21.5-3.fc9.