Spec Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools-0.0.8-1.src.rpm Description: The luks-tools package contains various utilities for working with LUKS-protected filesystems. HAL uses these utilities to automatically mount encrypted volumes when they are attached to a system, provided the user can produce the correct passphrase. These utilities are written as separate programs to allow MAC systems like SELinux to have fine-grained control over them.
Local build failed: checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate checking whether stripping libraries is possible... yes checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... (cached) yes checking whether ln -s works... yes checking for special C compiler options needed for large files... no checking for _FILE_OFFSET_BITS value needed for large files... 64 checking for _LARGE_FILES value needed for large files... no checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config checking for GLIB - version >= 2.0.0... yes (version 2.7.4) checking for cryptsetup... no configure: error: cryptsetup executable not found in your path Fehler: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.78258 (%build) RPM build errors: InstallSourcePackage: Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID cb278bd5 user mike does not exist - using root group mike does not exist - using root user mike does not exist - using root group mike does not exist - using root Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.78258 (%build)
Spec Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools-0.0.8-2.src.rpm
Created attachment 130765 [details] Make luks-setup build clean on FC5 The attached patch adds a BuildRequires on check-devel and adds /sbin:/usr/sbin to the path to the call to %configure so that it picks up cryptsetup and other tools that it uses.
Spec Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools-0.0.9-2.src.rpm
Hey Jochen. You moved this to FE-REVIEW, but didn't assign it to yourself. I am doing that now. If you are not going to review this, go ahead and reassign to nobody and set it back to block FE-NEW.
I will got the following complaint: Source luks-tools-0.0.9.tar.gz is different from upstream
Luks-tools 0.0.10 is synchronized with the upstream version: Spec Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools-0.0.10-1.src.rpm
Good: + Source match with upstream. + Mock build works fine. Bad: - Rpmlint complaints luks-tools W: luks-tools non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/gnome-luks-format.pyo 0644 W: luks-tools non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/gnome-luks-format.pyc 0644
Spec Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools-0.0.10-2.src.rpm
Bad: - rpmlint luks-tools complaints: $ rpmlint luks-tools-0.0.10-2.i386.rpm W: luks-tools non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/gnome-luks-format.pyo 0644 W: luks-tools non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/gnome-luks-format.pyc 0644
Okay, I was not familiar with brp-python-bytecompile. Spec Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/luks-tools-0.0.11-1.src.rpm
Good: + Local build works fine for FC-5. + Rpmlint has no complaints for binary rpm. + Rpmlint has no complaints for installed rpm. + Tar ball matched with upstream. + Binaries doesn't crash during startup. + Verbatin copy of license in %doc + License is GPLv2 + Mock build works fine for FC-5 Your package is APPOVED !!1