Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 448661
Review Request: u-boot-tools - contains mkimage a tool to create kernel bootable images for u-boot
Last modified: 2009-09-01 03:29:32 EDT
Spec URL: http://gate.crashing.org/~galak/u-boot-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://gate.crashing.org/~galak/u-boot-tools-1.3.3-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Das U-Boot (or just "U-Boot" for short) is Open Source Firmware for Embedded PowerPC, ARM, MIPS and x86 processors. This package contains mkimage, a tool that creates kernel bootable images for u-boot.
Weren't we adding this to the kernel, so it just turned up in the kernel-bootwrapper package?
I think over time we will want to include some of the other tools that exist as part of u-boot. Also, I've tried to make the location of 'mkimage' compatible with kernel-bootwrapper so if we do end up having this in the kernel we can just drop this package.
As weird as this sounds, you'll probably want to ExcludeArch the sparc, ia64, s390, etc architectures that this won't build on. Or provide configs for them, or ExclusiveArch the ones that work.
I didn't want to comment on this package, but I am having this issue with u-boot ever since it exists: "mkimage" is a very bad choice to name a program.
(In reply to comment #4) > I didn't want to comment on this package, but I am having this issue with u-boot > ever since it exists: > > "mkimage" is a very bad choice to name a program. It is, yes. I'm not entirely sure what can be done about it until upstream changes though.
source files match upstream: 6ee26954bb548ad90392cd329ab5cc4c package meets naming and versioning guidelines. specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. dist tag is present. license field matches the actual license. license is open source-compatible. license text included in package. latest version is being packaged. BuildRequires are proper. compiler flags are appropriate. %clean is present. package builds in mock. package installs properly. debuginfo package looks complete. rpmlint is silent. final provides and requires are sane no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. no duplicates in %files. file permissions are appropriate. no scriptlets present. code, not content. documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. no headers. no pkgconfig files. no libtool .la droppings. Needs fixing: build root is correct. (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) is the recommended value, but not the only one)
A couple comments that are pretty minor: - The way the package is done at the moment, it doesn't enable use of mkimage for cross building. Overall, that isn't a big deal as Fedora doesn't have in-distro cross compilers but if some show up it might be a good idea to see if we can provide that. - This will fail on sparc, s390, MIPS, ia64, or ARM. Those aren't currently official secondary arches for Fedora, however work is on-going for all those at the moment. It might be good to eventually have ExcludeArch directives for them (or work with the secondary architecture teams to enable building there). Aside from the minor buildroot issue, I don't see anything that would prevent this package from being approved. Be sure to apply for cvs_extras in the Fedora Accounts System so that you can be sponsored.
I've updated the BuildRoot and placed a new spec file at the same url: http://gate.crashing.org/~galak/u-boot-tools.spec http://gate.crashing.org/~galak/u-boot-tools-1.3.3-2.fc9.src.rpm
APPROVED.
Kumar, Josh approved your package. You need to find a sponsor before you can go on with the CVS admin procedure (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure). Please check https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored
I'll sponsor Kumar... if we can work out how. He's not in the 'TODO queue' of people who need sponsorship.
(In reply to comment #11) > I'll sponsor Kumar... if we can work out how. He's not in the 'TODO queue' of > people who need sponsorship. That's because I already sponsored him.
Kumar, can you please change your changelog entries according the examples in the package guidelines. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs Some other small things... - Please extent the summary a little bit because for users is not very helpful at the moment - for '/usr/sbin' exists a macro %{_sbindir} - Why are README, COPYING, etc. not added to %doc in %files? - And it would be nice if you update to 1.3.4 before you add it to the cvs ;-)
Any progress on this bug?
Two other small things... - The URL should be 'http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/WebHome' - Please preserve the time stamps while copying https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps Use %defattr(-,root,root,-) instead of %defattr(-,root,root) and leave %attr(755,root,root) away. Without further investigations, I think it will work. Or is there an issue with the permission of mkimage? For details https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#.25files_section
ping?
Ping. Any news here?
Last ping. I'm afraid, we should close this ticked ad FE-DEADREVIEW
I'd rather just take over this package instead of marking it DEADREVIEW.
Debian did put mkimage into a separate source package - http://packages.debian.org/lenny/uboot-mkimage. I can make and submit a rpm based on it.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 520569 ***