Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 58496

Summary: .spec file portability problem
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: R P Herrold <herrold>
Component: pineAssignee: Mike A. Harris <mharris>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.2   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2002-01-18 03:28:02 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description R P Herrold 2002-01-18 03:21:09 UTC
The change in the new specfile for update pine-4.44-1.72.0.src.rpm has
introduced a couple of portability problems.

From: Chris Adams <cmadams

This is the primary problem I've had.  For example, the RHL 7.2 pine RPM
had:

for n in pine pico pilot; do
    install -c -m 755 -s bin/$n $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/bin/$n
done

For the errata, someone decided it was "better" to do:

install -m 755 bin/{pine,pico,pilot,rpdump,rpload} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/bin/

Why?  There is no good reason not to use the more portable loop.

And they didn't fix the real problem: the use of /usr/bin instead of
%{_prefix}/bin or even better %{_bindir}. :-)

----------------------

This thread from the rpm-list on Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 21:03:27 -0600

Comment 1 R P Herrold 2002-01-18 03:27:58 UTC
*** Bug 58493 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Mike A. Harris 2002-01-18 08:04:48 UTC
Yes, I made that change.  It builds fine on all releases of Red Hat Linux
that I have built it on.  I'm not sure I understand the problem exactly.

Not portable to what exactly?

/usr/bin is not "better".  I'm not sure the goals of Red Hat Linux
coincide with whatever it is that whoever is trying to accomplish.

%{_bindir} is the proper location for the binaries to be placed in,
and it is exactly where they are.  I have no idea where the %{_prefix}
comes from as that string is found nowhere in the pine spec file.

%files
%defattr(-,root,root)
%doc README CPYRIGHT doc/*.txt doc/pine-ports doc/tech-notes
%doc doc/mailcap.unx imap/docs/bugs.txt
%{_bindir}/pine
%{_bindir}/pine-spellcheck
%{_bindir}/pico
%{_bindir}/pilot
%{_bindir}/rpdump
%{_bindir}/rpload
%{_mandir}/man1/pico.1*
%{_mandir}/man1/pine.1*
%{_mandir}/man1/pilot.1*
%{_mandir}/man1/rpdump.1*
%{_mandir}/man1/rpload.1*
%attr(0644,root,root)   %config /etc/pine.conf
%attr(0644,root,root)   %config /etc/pine.conf.fixed
 
%if %{with_gpgpine}
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/pinepgpgpg-install
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/pinegpg-install
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/pinegpg
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/gpg-sign
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/gpg-sign+encrypt
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/gpg-encrypt
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_bindir}/gpg-check
%endif