Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 176434
Summary: | Review Request: spicctrl: Sony Vaio laptop SPIC control program | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-extras-list |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-02-01 13:59:42 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Roozbeh Pournader
2005-12-22 19:00:26 UTC
Seeking advice: Apparently, Sony Vaio laptops are not available in every architecture (no ppc for example). Should I limit the architectures this package would build for? That would make sense to me. Vaio only comes in i386, right? :-) (In reply to comment #2) > That would make sense to me. Vaio only comes in i386, right? :-) I believe so. Or should I make it i686? Second try, adding an ExclusiveArch tag for i386 and i686: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl-1.9-1.2.src.rpm %changelog * Thu Dec 26 2005 Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh> 1.9-1.2 - Add ExclusiveArch (In reply to comment #4) > Second try, adding an ExclusiveArch tag for i386 and i686: This IMHO is wrong -- just use 'ExclusiveArch: i386'. Otherwise the buildsys probably will build the package for i386 and i686 without a reason. (In reply to comment #5) > This IMHO is wrong -- just use 'ExclusiveArch: i386'. Otherwise the buildsys > probably will build the package for i386 and i686 without a reason. Grepping some FC4 spec files, it seems that some use a "%{ix86}" macro (acpid, ant, apmd, ccs, cman, compat-gcc-296, cpufreq-utils, ...), some use "i386" only (awesfx, compat-slang, cpuspeed, crash, devhelp, diskdumputils, ...) eclipse apparently has switched from "i386" to "%{ix86}" some time in May 2005: http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/eclipse/FC-4/eclipse.spec?r1=1.126&r2=1.127 So apparently "i386 i686" is bad. I guess I should switch to "%{ix86}" because that is also what configure-thinkpad (from extras) uses. Third try, Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl-1.9-1.3.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Dec 26 2005 Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh> 1.9-1.3 - Change ExclusiveArch to %%{ix86} (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > This IMHO is wrong -- just use 'ExclusiveArch: i386'. Otherwise the buildsys > > probably will build the package for i386 and i686 without a reason. > Grepping some FC4 spec files, it seems that some use a "%{ix86}" macro (acpid, > ant, apmd, ccs, cman, compat-gcc-296, cpufreq-utils, ...), some use "i386" only > (awesfx, compat-slang, cpuspeed, crash, devhelp, diskdumputils, ...) Those are build with a different buildsys -- so only partly of interest here. > So apparently "i386 i686" is bad. I guess I should switch to "%{ix86}" because > that is also what configure-thinkpad (from extras) uses. configure-thinkpad was never build in plague. Technically you are correct with %{ix86} -- but as I said, plague will rebuild this for i386, i586, i686 (and maybe even athlon) IIRC (correct me if I'm wrong). There is no reason for that. So is still vote for: 'ExclusiveArch: i386' (In reply to comment #7) > configure-thinkpad was never build in plague. > > Technically you are correct with %{ix86} -- but as I said, plague will rebuild > this for i386, i586, i686 (and maybe even athlon) IIRC (correct me if I'm > wrong). There is no reason for that. So is still vote for: 'ExclusiveArch: i386' I guess you're wrong. Grepping Extras packages from 'development', the following use "%{ix86}", but I can see no i586 or i686 RPM in the built RPMs: athcool.spec:ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} atitvout.spec:ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} camstream.spec:ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 Glide3.spec:ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} alpha ia64 x86_64 jogl.spec:ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} ppc ... Checking dates, athcool, for example, appears to be last rebuilt on 2005-12-03, when the plague system was in place: 1538: athcool (athcool-0_3_11-3_fc5) gajownik needsign/success hammer2.fedora.redhat.com(i386): 3150b8e1da473c5338699cf8f9cb31cd1d85262d done/done (In reply to comment #8) > I guess you're wrong. According to your data: yes. But I tried with your latest package in a local plague-server and it build the package for i386 and i686... /me is even more confused now. But it's seems not that important... Apparently FE's build system takes care of %{ix86} properly, as is also evident from newer builds. So the latest spec and SRPM are fine. Anybody who cares to review? Updated version, now using the %{?dist} tag: Spec Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl.spec SRPM Url: http://guava.farsiweb.info/~roozbeh/spicctrl-1.9-1.4.src.rpm Release versions are always integers, not "1.4". You have might done this for the review, but please don't do it for releases. So please create a "2" release. Other then that, no issues. rpmlint gives one warning: W: spicctrl dangerous-command-in-%post rm Which i guess is fine, assuming that the device would not be in use. I'm 500km from my vaio right now, but I will be able to check the functionality next week. FE-APPROVED |