|Summary:||build fails after undocumented incompatible changes to RPM|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta>|
|Component:||lvm2||Assignee:||Alasdair Kergon <agk>|
|Status:||CLOSED RAWHIDE||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||agk, bmarzins, bmr, dwysocha, mbroz, prockai|
|Target Milestone:||---||Keywords:||Patch, Reopened|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-10-07 20:20:49 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Ville Skyttä 2008-09-21 09:38:05 UTC
Created attachment 317312 [details] Fix Patch0:/%patch mismatch This package was identified as one that was bit by a bug in Rawhide rpm: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-September/msg00375.html The rpm bug has been fixed, so currently this is "only" a FTBFS bug for this package - no builds with the broken rpm have apparently been done or tagged for F-10. Fix attached, I was not able to commit it myself due to CVS ACL restrictions.
Comment 1 Alasdair Kergon 2008-09-21 15:26:40 UTC
(I'll commit, with a comment explaining it's due to a change in the spec file definition.)
Comment 2 Alasdair Kergon 2008-09-23 22:52:57 UTC
Applied - although it's trivial, rebuild submitted as there's a reasonable chance we won't be building again before the next freeze. (2.02.40 needs to see more testing before I'll know if it's good enough for Fedora at this stage of the release cycle.)
Comment 3 Alasdair Kergon 2008-09-24 00:59:24 UTC
Well the rebuild fails - it looks like someone changed something to do with exec_prefix too so various files are getting placed in the wrong directories - we even have something looking in /usr/usr now! ...moans about the lack of any follow-up announcement to fedora-devel-announce about stuff like this...
Comment 4 Alasdair Kergon 2008-10-07 20:20:49 UTC
They seem to have changed the way exec_prefix is expanded: our spec file changes this but the new rpm code must expand other macros that use exec_prefix too soon - so our revised value is not taken into account and the default gets used. After much experimentation, I have applied a workaround, which involves overriding the values of the other macros too and the build has now succeeded.