Prev: Ideas for distributed Samba servers
Next: Upgrading 3.2.15 to 3.3.12 sernet package on opensuse 10.2
From: Nico Kadel-Garcia on 14 Apr 2010 18:50
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 4:42 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Volker Lendecke
> <Volker.Lendecke(a)sernet.de> wrote:

>> http://ftp.sernet.de/pub/samba/3.5/src/rpm/samba3-3.5.2-43.suse91.src.rpm
>>
>> Odd name to build on CentOS, but we build all RPMs from a
>> single source RPM and pick one to upload.
>>
>> Volker

Volker, this SRPM does *not* compile on clean RHEL 5.4 x86_64, neither
from my command line nor in a "mock" configuration. It seems to rely
on interpreting various config files to decide whether it is RHEL, and
then to decide whether to build debuginfo as a separate component, and
it fails on the resulting duplicate debuginfo compilation.

Given that you haven't published the actual SRPM used referred to by
your RPM's, and that I can't compile the SRPM you did publish, I don't
feel I can use this package. Moreover, if this isn't actually the SRPM
you used, you may be in violation of the GPL. (Not deliberately, of
course!!!)

Can you publish the actual SRPM built for RHEL 5, or explain how you
were able to compile this package for RHEL 5?
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
From: Nico Kadel-Garcia on 15 Apr 2010 06:50
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Björn Jacke <bj(a)sernet.de> wrote:
> On 2010-04-14 at 18:48 -0400 Nico Kadel-Garcia sent off:
>> Can you publish the actual SRPM built for RHEL 5, or explain how you
>> were able to compile this package for RHEL 5?
>
> that SRPM that Volker mentioned is the correct SRPM. There is no different
> SRPM. The fact that you see a different distribution tag there is because the
> spec file does not know how the src.rpm that it was extracted from was named
> and the distribution tag is generated at built time.  For that reason, if you
> take a look at any of the binary RPMs on ftp.sernet.de you'll see on each
> distibution package set that it was built from it's own distribution specific
> spec file. It might be that compilation of the srpm is not as trivialized as it
> might be. If you have any suggestions or fixes availabe to make it work on your
> flavour or patchlevel of RHEL5 you're welcome to send us them so that we can
> incorporate them and make compilation from the srpm also for other
> people even more convenient.
>
> Cheers
> Björn

It's cool. Where I'm working these days, I have to be really careful
about software provenance.

I remain confused that the RPM's you publish all have something like
this in their 'rpm -qi' information. Notice that the 'Source RPM' they
lise is not the suse91 SRPM, it's an 'el5' SRPM. I assume this is
because you're doing your builds for RHEL with a tool like 'mock',
that first rebuilds the SRPM you are working from as a new SRPM
precisely to get tags and PGP signatures right, then builds the RPM's
from that.

$ rpm -qip ldb-tools-3.5.2-43.el5.x86_64.rpm
warning: ldb-tools-3.5.2-43.el5.x86_64.rpm: Header V4 DSA signature:
NOKEY, key ID f4428b1a
Name : ldb-tools Relocations: (not relocatable)
Version : 3.5.2 Vendor: Service
Network GmbH, Goettingen
Release : 43.el5 Build Date: Tue 06 Apr
2010 07:37:55 AM EDT
Install Date: (not installed) Build Host: sam
Group : Productivity/Networking/Samba Source RPM:
samba3-3.5.2-43.el5.src.rpm
Size : 11378307 License: GPL v3 or later
Signature : DSA/SHA1, Tue 06 Apr 2010 09:38:12 AM EDT, Key ID d9921b1cf4428b1a
Packager : SerNet Samba Team <Samba(a)SerNet.DE>
URL : http://www.samba.org
Summary : SerNet Samba ldb tools
Description :
This packages contains the tools to manage ldb databases
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
From: Nico Kadel-Garcia on 15 Apr 2010 07:30
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:20 AM, Volker Lendecke
<Volker.Lendecke(a)sernet.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 06:48:09PM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:

>> Can you publish the actual SRPM built for RHEL 5, or explain how you
>> were able to compile this package for RHEL 5?
>
> All I can say at this moment is that according to our
> internal procedures, the source RPM I referred you to is the
> one we are building from. I will investigate if something
> went wrong in posting this to the ftp server. We will
> certainly do everything necessary to ship the source code
> for the binaries you can download from our website to comply
> with the GPL.
>
> Can you please post the specific error message you are
> getting? It might be that our BuildRequires: line in the
> specfile is not correct or something else in our build
> environment is different than your host.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Volker

Thanks. I responded to Bjorn about the provenance of your SRPM.

Here are my error messages: This occurs on RHEL 5.4 and CentOS 5.4,
x86_64 architecture, in a normal home directory build and under mock.

$ rpmbuild --rebuild samba3-3.5.2-43.suse91.src.rpm
Installing samba3-3.5.2-43.suse91.src.rpm
warning: InstallSourcePackage: Header V4 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID f4428b1a
error: Package already exists: %package debuginfo

Looking more deeply, I see your fascinating logic around
'this_is_redhat'., which seems to be failing. I've no idea why it's
failing, but I've previously found group statements to be a bit subtle
and unreliable unless you're very careful to set 'LANG' to something
predictable. In particular, in RHEL 5 with the default en_US.UTF8
setup, grep is case insensitive and should therefore be avoided unless
you set 'LANG=POSIX' or something reliable, first.

I'd like to suggest some cleaner logic for RedHat detection, as
included in this patch:

$ diff -u samba-3.5.spec.default samba-3.5.spec
--- samba-3.5.spec.default 2010-04-06 06:14:28.000000000 -0400
+++ samba-3.5.spec 2010-04-15 07:10:57.000000000 -0400
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
Url: http://www.samba.org
Vendor: Service Network GmbH, Goettingen
%define releasefile %(ls /etc/SuSE-release
/etc/UnitedLinux-release /etc/sles-release /etc/redhat-release
2>/dev/null | head -n1)
-%define this_is_redhat %(echo %{releasefile} | grep
-qi red && echo 1 || echo 0)
+%define this_is_redhat %([ -e /etc/redhat-release ]
&& echo 1 || echo 0)
Distribution: %(head -n1 < %{releasefile} || echo some SUSE-flavour ... )
%if %(echo "%{distribution}" | grep -q "UnitedLinux" && echo 1 || echo 0 )
%define suse_ver 81

This patch allows compilation. I'm running a complete build right now.
--
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Ideas for distributed Samba servers
Next: Upgrading 3.2.15 to 3.3.12 sernet package on opensuse 10.2