Bug 682481 - Required package "asciidoc" missing from distribution
Summary: Required package "asciidoc" missing from distribution
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: distribution
Version: 6.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
low
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: RHEL Program Management
QA Contact: Petr Šplíchal
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-03-05 23:28 UTC by Quentin Barnes
Modified: 2016-06-01 01:41 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-02-01 10:02:52 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Quentin Barnes 2011-03-05 23:28:29 UTC
Description of problem:
The kernel spec file requires the package "asciidoc", but "asciidoc" is not part of the distribution.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible: 100%


Steps to Reproduce:
1. mkdir /tmp/junk
2. rpm -i --define '_topdir /tmp/junk' {...}/kernel-2.6.32-71.18.1.el6.src.rpm
3. rpmbuild -bb --define '_topdir /tmp/junk' --target=noarch --without perf --without firmware /tmp/junk/SPECS/kernel.spec
  
Actual results:
[...]
error: Failed build dependencies:
        asciidoc is needed by kernel-2.6.32-71.18.1.el6.noarch
Building target platforms: noarch
Building for target noarch

I cannot find the asciidoc RPM as part of the RHEL6 distribution to install.

Expected results:
The RPM package kernel-doc-2.6.32-71.18.1.el6.noarch.rpm is built.


Additional info:
If I download the asciidoc RPM from non-RH sources, the kernel-doc package builds fine.  However, I would expect that if RH requires an RPM for building its software that that RPM would be provided.  Is this just a simple oversight, or is there a reason the package isn't provided?

Comment 2 RHEL Program Management 2011-03-05 23:58:17 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated
in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to
address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to
ask your support representative to propose this request, if
appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux. If you would like it considered as an
exception in the current release, please ask your support
representative.

Comment 3 Quentin Barnes 2011-03-09 17:11:26 UTC
I looked on RHN under the normal "RHEL Server" and the "RHEL Server Supplementary" for RHEL6 packages download area.  I didn't realize that these two areas don't include all packages that are available for a particular release.

Comment 5 RHEL Program Management 2011-07-06 01:34:36 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated
in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to
address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to
ask your support representative to propose this request, if
appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux. If you would like it considered as an
exception in the current release, please ask your support
representative.

Comment 8 Suzanne Logcher 2012-01-31 21:18:34 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the
current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Because the affected component is
not scheduled to be updated in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately
unable to address this request at this time.  It has been proposed for the next
release. If you would like it considered as an exception in the current
release, please ask your support representative.

Comment 9 Quentin Barnes 2012-01-31 21:47:26 UTC
With Comment 3, the bug should have closed (when I found the RPM in "Server Optional" repository.  Not sure why it's there.).  I didn't realize the bug didn't close then.  Closing now.

Comment 10 Quentin Barnes 2012-01-31 21:49:56 UTC
Ah, I see, as an "ordinary" user I'm not allowed to change the status of my own bug to closed.  :-(

Would someone close this "notabug" please?

Comment 11 Petr Šplíchal 2012-02-01 10:02:52 UTC
I see. Thanks for making this clear, Quentin. Closing.


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