Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 463062 - build fails after undocumented incompatible changes to RPM
Summary: build fails after undocumented incompatible changes to RPM
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: lvm2
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Alasdair Kergon
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: F10FTBFS
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2008-09-21 09:38 UTC by Ville Skyttä
Modified: 2008-10-07 20:20 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-10-07 20:20:49 UTC


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Fix Patch0:/%patch mismatch (deleted)
2008-09-21 09:38 UTC, Ville Skyttä
no flags Details | Diff

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.


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