Spec URL: http://vcrhonek.fedorapeople.org/sblim-cmpi-network/sblim-cmpi-network.spec SRPM URL: http://vcrhonek.fedorapeople.org/sblim-cmpi-network/sblim-cmpi-network-1.3.8-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Standards Based Linux Instrumentation Network Providers
fails to build on Fedora 10 * sblim-cmpi-base libraries have wrong permission (#501812) * other failure I haven't diagnosed (see below) Missing dependency on sblim-testsuite. Includes it's own schema file, instead of using the cim-schema package (#468287). build failure: it's trying to link libOSBase_CommonNetwork.a _before_ it has generated it. gcc -shared .libs/cmpiOSBase_EthernetPortProvider.o .libs/cmpiOSBase_EthernetPort.o -lOSBase_CommonNetwork -m64 -mtune=generic -Wl,-soname -Wl,libcmpiOSBase_EthernetPortProvider.so -o .libs/libc mpiOSBase_EthernetPortProvider.so /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lOSBase_CommonNetwork collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[1]: *** [libcmpiOSBase_EthernetPortProvider.la] Error 1 make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... (cd .libs && rm -f libOSBase_CommonNetwork.so.0 && ln -s libOSBase_CommonNetwork.so.0.0.0 libOSBase_CommonNetwork.so.0) (cd .libs && rm -f libOSBase_CommonNetwork.so && ln -s libOSBase_CommonNetwork.so.0.0.0 libOSBase_CommonNetwork.so) ar cru .libs/libOSBase_CommonNetwork.a OSBase_CommonNetwork.o ranlib .libs/libOSBase_CommonNetwork.a creating libOSBase_CommonNetwork.la
removing the %{?_smp_mflags} from the make resolves the build problem, meaning it's a simple parallel build dependency failure.
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/sblim-cmpi-network-* sblim-cmpi-network-debuginfo.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/lib/debug 0775 sblim-cmpi-network-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation sblim-cmpi-network-test.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. now that it builds I can do a more formal review.
I couldn't download the source rpm. Could you please check the link or provide with the above mentioned changes?
(In reply to comment #3) > $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/sblim-cmpi-network-* > sblim-cmpi-network-debuginfo.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/lib/debug > 0775 > sblim-cmpi-network-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > sblim-cmpi-network-test.x86_64: W: no-documentation > 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. > > now that it builds I can do a more formal review. Could you please provide working links to this package? I cannot access the source package from the original post.
Sorry, I did new srpm since beginning of the review. Spec URL: http://vcrhonek.fedorapeople.org/sblim-cmpi-network/sblim-cmpi-network.spec SRPM URL: http://vcrhonek.fedorapeople.org/sblim-cmpi-network/sblim-cmpi-network-1.3.8-1.fc10.src.rpm
Is there a way to also consider sblim-sfcb also as a possible CIMOM instead of only considering tog-pegasus? It was discussed before at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466183#c10, wouldn't it be better to have Requires:cim-server/cimserver instead of tog-pegasus. This allows sblim-sfcb also to be a possible CIMOM. Since the sblim-sfcb package already has "Provides:cim-server", it is better we leverage that in this package. But I am concerned about the "BuildRequires" and also about mentioning the right devel packages in "BuildRequires" and "Requries". Any suggestions??
Final Review: 1) The definition of tog_pegasus_version in spec file, I am not sure what the colon (:) supposed to be? Could you clarify? 2) For each of the "Requires", could you please add comments justifying why you need those packages. rpmlint output: ##rpmlint sblim-cmpi-network.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. ##rpmlint sblim-cmpi-network-1.3.8-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Everything else looks good.
One last thing, Please replace every mentioning of "sblim-cmpi-network" with %{name} in the spec file. (line 26, 35 and 65)
Implemented the changes suggested. Final rpmlint output: # rpmlint sblim-cmpi-network.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # rpmlint ../SRPMS/sblim-cmpi-network-1.3.8-1.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/sblim-cmpi-network-* sblim-cmpi-network-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation sblim-cmpi-network-test.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Fixed these warnings. Spec URL: http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/sblim-cmpi-network/sblim-cmpi-network.spec SRPM URL: http://linux.dell.com/files/fedora/sblim-cmpi-network/sblim-cmpi-network-1.3.8-1.fc11.src.rpm
Approved.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: sblim-cmpi-network Short Description: Standards Based Linux Instrumentation Network Providers Owners: vcrhonek Branches: F-12 InitialCC:
I'm looking for volunteers to go through Review Request of few other sblim-* packages, so if anyone is interested, feel free to take them;)
I've asked for someone, anyone, to write up some minimal packaging guidelines so that the reviewers will have an idea of what these packages are supposed to look like. I doubt most reviewers are going to look at these package at all until we have something like that. We cannot create F-12 branches yet. Otherwise, CVS done.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: sblim-cmpi-network Short Description: Standards Based Linux Instrumentation Network Providers Owners: vcrhonek Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-4 EL-5 EPEL-4 EPEL-5 InitialCC: praveenp mdomsch srini
There are not EPEL-4/EPEL-5 branches, you get those with EL-4/EL-5. ;) cvs done.
(In reply to comment #16) > There are not EPEL-4/EPEL-5 branches, you get those with EL-4/EL-5. ;) > > cvs done. Kevin, I get the following errors, when I tried to import this package to any of the branches. """ Access denied: praveenp is not in ACL for rpms/sblim-cmpi-network/devel cvs commit: Pre-commit check failed cvs [commit aborted]: correct above errors first! """ Is this because I am not among the "Owners" for this package? If so, could you please add me to the list of owners for this package?
praveen, you didn't request to be an owner, so you're not. You can go to https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb, select this package, and request various package rights.
Thanks!
Was someone going to request this to be tagged for F-12?
This package is already available in F-12 branch.