[OpenAFS-devel] OpenAFS on Yellow Dog 5.0.2

Derrick Brashear shadow@gmail.com
Tue, 16 Oct 2007 08:25:17 -0400


------=_Part_20138_15262816.1192537517761
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 10/16/07, Atro Tossavainen <atro.tossavainen+openafs@helsinki.fi> wrote:
>
> Derrick,
>
> (I decided to join the list after all.)
>
> > Good to know no 2 distributions can ship something without at least
> > one "improving" it.


Apparently rpm isn't rpm isn't rpm everywhere, if the spec file that works
on RedHat and Fedora breaks on YellowDog, eh?



> It does, but I didn't do it when doing this by hand, I only applied
> the patches.  Now that I've also done that, building the kernel
> module was successful.
>
> > choosing the largest version number available is seldom what you
> > actually want.
>
> I know.  I'm operating under the delusion that choosing the largest
> version number might stand the best chance of supporting the most
> recent versions of the underlying OS out of the box (FSVO supporting;
> at least compiling cleanly on).


Not even, because 1.4.x and 1.5.x are released disjointly.


> i expect there will be an srpm for 1.4.5pre2, if someone can give a hint
> > as to what we might need to fix in src/packaging/RedHat/openafs.spec.in
> in
> > 1.4.5pre1 I will see if we can accomodate Yellow Dog
>
> I'm seeing a 1.4.5pre2 srpm already.



Well, for 1.4.5pre3, then, but, yes you are since I needed to get one with a
fix out :)

Whatever is causing the
> "Package has no %description" is still there.  It's on line 233
> now, which seems to be
>
> %if %{build_userspace}
>
> So I need to rpmbuild --define macro\ something for every macro?
>
> # rpmbuild --rebuild --define build_userspace\ 0 --define build_authlibs\
> 0 openafs-1.4.5pre2-1.1.src.rpm
> Installing openafs-1.4.5pre2-1.1.src.rpm
> error: Architecture is not included: ppc


Ok, well, we can fix that.


Oh well...
>
> BTW. On a completely different note, I've been meaning to ask for a
> long time whether there's a reason the Makefiles in OpenAFS aren't
> fit for parallel compilation (aka gmake -j).



No one's gone through and fixed them to always have the right dependancies.

------=_Part_20138_15262816.1192537517761
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/16/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Atro Tossavainen</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:atro.tossavainen+openafs@helsinki.fi">atro.tossavainen+openafs@helsinki.fi</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Derrick,<br><br>(I decided to join the list after all.)<br><br>&gt; Good to know no 2 distributions can ship something without at least<br>&gt; one &quot;improving&quot; it.</blockquote><div><br>Apparently rpm isn&#39;t rpm isn&#39;t rpm everywhere, if the spec file that works on RedHat and Fedora breaks on YellowDog, eh?
<br>&nbsp;<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>It does, but I didn&#39;t do it when doing this by hand, I only applied
<br>the patches.&nbsp;&nbsp;Now that I&#39;ve also done that, building the kernel<br>module was successful.<br><br>&gt; choosing the largest version number available is seldom what you<br>&gt; actually want.<br><br>I know.&nbsp;&nbsp;I&#39;m operating under the delusion that choosing the largest
<br>version number might stand the best chance of supporting the most<br>recent versions of the underlying OS out of the box (FSVO supporting;<br>at least compiling cleanly on).</blockquote><div><br>Not even, because 1.4.x
 and 1.5.x are released disjointly.<br>&nbsp;<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">&gt; i expect there will be an srpm for 
1.4.5pre2, if someone can give a hint<br>&gt; as to what we might need to fix in src/packaging/RedHat/openafs.spec.in in<br>&gt; 1.4.5pre1 I will see if we can accomodate Yellow Dog<br><br>I&#39;m seeing a 1.4.5pre2 srpm already.&nbsp;&nbsp;
</blockquote><div><br><br>Well, for 1.4.5pre3, then, but, yes you are since I needed to get one with a fix out :) <br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Whatever is causing the<br>&quot;Package has no %description&quot; is still there.&nbsp;&nbsp;It&#39;s on line 233<br>now, which seems to be<br><br>%if %{build_userspace}<br><br>So I need to rpmbuild --define macro\ something for every macro?
<br><br># rpmbuild --rebuild --define build_userspace\ 0 --define build_authlibs\ 0 openafs-1.4.5pre2-1.1.src.rpm<br>Installing openafs-1.4.5pre2-1.1.src.rpm<br>error: Architecture is not included: ppc</blockquote><div><br>
Ok, well, we can fix that.<br><br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Oh well...<br><br>BTW. On a completely different note, I&#39;ve been meaning to ask for a
<br>long time whether there&#39;s a reason the Makefiles in OpenAFS aren&#39;t<br>fit for parallel compilation (aka gmake -j).&nbsp;&nbsp;</blockquote><div><br><br>No one&#39;s gone through and fixed them to always have the right dependancies. 
<br></div><br></div><br>

------=_Part_20138_15262816.1192537517761--