Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 509399
Review Request: bitfrost - OLPC security platform
Last modified: 2009-08-11 18:33:17 EDT
Spec URL: http://dev.laptop.org/~dsd/20090702/bitfrost.spec
SRPM URL: http://dev.laptop.org/~dsd/20090702/bitfrost-1.0.0-1.fc11.src.rpm
This represents an effort to get more of OLPC's platform included in Fedora and also to clean up the current disorganised distribution of bitfrost modules (which are scattered over various packages).
The sugar-update-control package will need to be modified to depend on this (rather than shipping its own bitfrost modules). More packages which use these modules will be added soon.
Please review this package for F11 inclusion.
Created attachment 350300 [details]
patch for sugar-update-control spec file
I'll start looking at this today.
Spec file looks good. However will not build on Koji.
See build log here
When you have a SRPM that builds let me know and I'll finish the review.
Fixed by adding BuildRequires: bitfrost
I mean, BuildRequires: Pyrex
Builds fine for i586 but fails on x86_64. See build log here. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1458702&name=build.log
fixed 2 problems: build with -fPIC for libraries
install into python_sitearch
Koji scratch build passed
will finish this tonight. thanks for the work to get it to build
Everything looks good here and it built just fine for all archs. I'll approve this with one caveat. Just remove the conflicts: sugar-update-control. When you do the initial build go on and apply your patch to s-u-c and do a chain-build. this will build a new s-u-c package at this same time so the conflicts will not be needed. Don't forget to include s-u-c in your bodhi request for F11.
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: bitfrost
Short Description: OLPC bitfrost security modules
Owners: dsd cjb pbrobinson
sugar-update-control-0.21-2.fc11,bitfrost-1.0.1-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
sugar-update-control-0.21-2.fc11, bitfrost-1.0.1-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.