Bug 183067 - Review Request: par2 - PAR2 recovery set command line utility
Review Request: par2 - PAR2 recovery set command line utility
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 190070
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Thorsten Leemhuis (ignored mailbox)
Fedora Package Reviews List
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-02-25 18:07 EST by Aaron Kurtz
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:11 EST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-05-31 08:25:00 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Aaron Kurtz 2006-02-25 18:07:24 EST
Spec Name or Url: http://hardsun.net/fedora/par2.spec
SRPM Name or Url: http://hardsun.net/fedora/par2-0.4-1.src.rpm

Description: This application provides support for PAR2 
files. Parity archives provide RAID-like data recovery for
files, allowing the recovery of any 'X' real data-blocks for
'X' parity data-blocks present. Version 2 extends this to
virtual slices of files, reducing the required redundant data
and making it easier to include non-like sized files in the
recovery set.
Comment 1 Konstantin Ryabitsev 2006-02-25 19:07:12 EST
There is "parchive" already in Extras. Same thing?
Comment 2 Aaron Kurtz 2006-02-25 19:55:43 EST
No, parchive deals with PAR or PAR1 files, while
par2 is the utility for the next generation spec,
PAR2. 
Comment 3 Ralf Corsepius 2006-02-26 01:19:21 EST
NEEDSWORK:
- package doesn't depend on libsigc++ at all.
Please remove "BR: libsigc++-devel"

- I don't see any need for 001_hardlinks.patch
The original authors want these programs hardlinks, so be it.

- Compilation triggers dozens of warnings of this kind:
...
par2fileformat.h:67: warning: ignoring packed attribute on unpacked non-POD
field 'MD5Hash PACKET_HEADER::hash'
par2fileformat.h:68: warning: ignoring packed attribute on unpacked non-POD
field 'MD5Hash PACKET_HEADER::setid'
par2fileformat.h:79: warning: ignoring packed attribute on unpacked non-POD
field 'MD5Hash FILEVERIFICATIONENTRY::hash'
par2fileformat.h:86: warning: ignoring packed attribute on unpacked non-POD
field 'MD5Hash FILEVERIFICATIONPACKET::fileid'
...
In many cases, these warnings can not be ignored. Please check.

- The toplevel Makefile.am contains this:
LDADD = -lstdc++

This is a BUG. Remove this line.


Comment 4 Kevin Larkin 2006-04-20 23:22:07 EDT
[root@hondaserver ~]# rpmbuild --rebuild par2-0.4-1.src.rpm 
Installing par2-0.4-1.src.rpm
warning: user dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: group dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: user dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: group dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: user dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: group dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: user dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: group dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: user dragoon does not exist - using root
warning: group dragoon does not exist - using root
error: Failed build dependencies:
        libsigc++20-devel is needed by par2-0.4-1.x86_64

I have installed libsigc++20-devel and it still wont build.
Comment 5 Laurent Rineau 2006-05-10 11:09:55 EDT
It seems this bug is a dup of #190070. (Actually, it is #190070 that should 
have been a dup of this bug, since I posted it after yours.)

Aaron, you can find the FE spec file of par2cmdline at:
  http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/par2cmdline/devel/?root=extras
You are welcome to make comments about this spec file. I already have taken 
into account comment #3 of Ralf.

(Ralf, I add you to CC list. Perhaps you have super-powers mark this bug as 
dup.)
Comment 6 Laurent Rineau 2006-05-31 08:25:00 EDT
No anwser. I got fedorabugs membership since then. I close this bug.


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 190070 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.