Hide Forgot
Description of problem: error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/systemtap/tapset/glib.stp /usr/share/systemtap/tapset/gobject.stp Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): glib2-2.26.0-3.el6 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: unpackaged files Expected results: there should be no unpackaget files Additional info:
Hm; I'm guessing something pulled systemtap into the buildroot since Matthew did the rebase here? Regardless, the tap scrips to the best of my knowledge are not tested extensively in Fedora, so we should probably be conservative and not ship them in RHEL6.
(In reply to Colin Walters from comment #1) > Hm; I'm guessing something pulled systemtap into the buildroot since Matthew > did the rebase here? Regardless, the tap scrips to the best of my knowledge > are not tested extensively in Fedora, so we should probably be conservative > and not ship them in RHEL6. So shouldn't we just remove them in post phase? Tom
http://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/brew/taskinfo?taskID=6215032
Colin one more thought. Seems these files are going to be created only in case is it build on system with SystemTap. Without it I believe they will not appear. So the configure script may automatically expect system without SystemTap. That might cause confusion. Tom
(In reply to Tomas Pelka from comment #4) > Colin one more thought. > > Seems these files are going to be created only in case is it build on system > with SystemTap. Without it I believe they will not appear. So the configure > script may automatically expect system without SystemTap. The configure options should always win; if we say --disable-systemtap, it shouldn't complain at us if the buildroot happens to contain systemtap. And that is how the code works.
Yes this is what I meant :D
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-1545.html