Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
DescriptionBranislav Náter
2014-02-04 13:01:48 UTC
Description of problem:
We are doing checks regarding correct placement of *.py[co] files in rpm packages.
In your x86_64 package, we found *.py[co] files placed under /usr/lib/ directory. In 64bit package *.py[co] files are expected to be placed in /usr/lib64/ dir or package to be build as noarch package.
Could you please move files to /usr/lib64?
Or should this package be build as noarch?
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
python-libguestfs-1.22.6-18.el7.x86_64.rpm
Actual results:
python-libguestfs-1.22.6-18.el7.x86_64.rpm]: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/guestfs.py
python-libguestfs-1.22.6-18.el7.x86_64.rpm]: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/guestfs.pyc
python-libguestfs-1.22.6-18.el7.x86_64.rpm]: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/guestfs.pyo
Expected results:
Correct placement of files under /usr/lib64 or package built as noarch
Comment 1Richard W.M. Jones
2014-02-04 13:54:00 UTC
So the problem turns out to be the RPM spec file which does:
# Move Python libraries to sitelib.
if [ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitearch}" != "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitelib}" ]; then
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitelib}
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitearch}/guestfs.py* \
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitelib}/
fi
which is wrong since the Python package is not noarch.
I have removed this section from Rawhide now:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/libguestfs.git/commit/?id=f36b756d0807ee958a6a60585fd520330033a56f
After the Rawhide fix:
$ rpm -qlp ./x86_64/python-libguestfs-1.25.32-2.fc21.x86_64.rpm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/guestfs.py
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/guestfs.pyc
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/guestfs.pyo
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/libguestfsmod.so
/usr/share/doc/python-libguestfs
/usr/share/doc/python-libguestfs/create_disk.py
/usr/share/doc/python-libguestfs/inspect_vm.py
/usr/share/man/man3/guestfs-python.3.gz
This request was resolved in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.0.
Contact your manager or support representative in case you have further questions about the request.