Bug 440368 - FTBFS xen-3.2.0-10.fc9
Summary: FTBFS xen-3.2.0-10.fc9
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 429723
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: mock
Version: rawhide
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
low
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Xen Maintainance List
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/Fi...
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FTBFS
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2008-04-03 04:34 UTC by FTBFS
Modified: 2008-04-03 16:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-04-03 16:11:34 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
root.log.bz (1.97 KB, application/x-bzip2)
2008-04-03 04:35 UTC, FTBFS
no flags Details
build.log.bz (475 bytes, application/x-bzip2)
2008-04-03 04:35 UTC, FTBFS
no flags Details

Description FTBFS 2008-04-03 04:34:57 UTC
xen-3.2.0-10.fc9.src.rpm Failed To Build From Source

Comment 1 FTBFS 2008-04-03 04:35:04 UTC
Created attachment 300174 [details]
root.log.bz

root.log for x86_64

Comment 2 FTBFS 2008-04-03 04:35:06 UTC
Created attachment 300175 [details]
build.log.bz

build.log for x86_64

Comment 3 Daniel Berrangé 2008-04-03 11:52:49 UTC
Your mock config is broken & excluding i386 packages on x86_64 which is required
to build the BIOS.

Comment 4 FTBFS 2008-04-03 15:50:43 UTC
It's using the configs that mock provides...

Comment 5 FTBFS 2008-04-03 16:05:09 UTC
reopen and reassign to mock.  The exclude line being used should have allowed
glibc.i?86 to be included, but clearly it wasn't.

# grub/syslinux on x86_64 need glibc-devel.i386 which pulls in glibc.i386, need
to exclude all
# .i?86 packages except these.
exclude=[0-9A-Za-fh-z]*.i?86 g[0-9A-Za-km-z]*.i?86 gl[0-9A-Za-hj-z]*.i?86
gli[0-9A-Zac-z]*.i?86 glib[0-9A-Za-bd-z]*.i?86


yet root.log shows:
No Package Found for /usr/include/gnu/stubs-32.h
which is provided by glibc-devel.i686  So it's ugly, but we need to not exclude
glibc-devel.i?86.

Reassigning to mock.

Comment 6 Daniel Berrangé 2008-04-03 16:11:34 UTC
I reported this mock bug months ago but it seems it was never fixed :-(

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429723

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 429723 ***


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