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 471263
Summary: | Disable kernel-firmware package/dependency for s390x | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Brad Hinson <bhinson> |
Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Kernel Maintainer List <kernel-maint> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 10 | CC: | dwmw2, kernel-maint, maurizio.antillon, quintela |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | s390x | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2009-06-25 15:15:51 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: | 467765 |
Description
Brad Hinson
2008-11-12 17:53:29 UTC
does adding %define with_firmware 0 to the %ifarch s390x section around line 300 in the specfile do the right thing? rpmbuild of kernel doesn't produce a kernel-firmware package on _any_ architecture. The kernel-firmware package is noarch. oh, yeah. hmm. we could make the Requires: dependant on %ifnarch s390x maybe. given the absence of PCI/USB on s390's I doubt there's anything useful in the firmware rpm at all on that arch. That would be possible. But why bother with a special case? %define kernel_prereq ... kernel-firmware >= %{rpmversion}-%{pkg_release} With that line in the spec, wouldn't all arches depend on kernel-firmware? I think we need a special case here. completely untested, but something like .. --- F-10/kernel.spec~ 2008-11-12 14:07:13.000000000 -0500 +++ F-10/kernel.spec 2008-11-12 14:09:58.000000000 -0500 @@ -422,7 +422,10 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel # Packages that need to be installed before the kernel is, because the %post # scripts use them. # -%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools, initscripts >= 8.11.1-1, mkinitrd >= 6.0.61-1, kernel-firmware >= %{rpmversion}-%{pkg_release} +%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools, initscripts >= 8.11.1-1, mkinitrd >= 6.0.61-1 +%ifnarch s390x +%define kernelfw_prereq kernel-firmware >= %{rpmversion}-%{pkg_release} +%endif # # This macro does requires, provides, conflicts, obsoletes for a kernel package. @@ -437,7 +440,7 @@ Provides: kernel-drm = 4.3.0\ Provides: kernel-drm-nouveau = 11\ Provides: kernel-modeset = 1\ Provides: kernel-uname-r = %{KVERREL}%{?1:.%{1}}\ -Requires(pre): %{kernel_prereq}\ +Requires(pre): %{kernel_prereq} %{kernelfw_prereq}\ Conflicts: %{kernel_dot_org_conflicts}\ Conflicts: %{package_conflicts}\ %{expand:%%{?kernel%{?1:_%{1}}_conflicts:Conflicts: %%{kernel%{?1:_%{1}}_conflicts}}}\ might do the trick. That, together with comment 1, should do the trick. Comment 6 leads to rpmbuild error though: error: line 484: Dependency tokens must begin with alpha-numeric, '_' or '/': Requires(pre): fileutils, module-init-tools, initscripts >= 8.11.1-1, mkinitrd >= 6.0.39-1 %{kernel_fw_prereq} I think it's because Requires(pre) is inside of "%define kernel_reqprovconf", so maybe it doesn't like the space between %{kernel_prereq} and %{kernel_fw_prereq}\ (In reply to comment #5) > %define kernel_prereq ... kernel-firmware >= %{rpmversion}-%{pkg_release} > > With that line in the spec, wouldn't all arches depend on kernel-firmware? Yes. That is the intention. > I think we need a special case here. Why? Why not just install kernel-firmware? I see no need for making S390 a special case. In response to comment 2: If rpmbuild doesn't produce kernel-firmware on any arch, what is the process to produce this package? I'm bootstrapping Fedora on a new arch using koji, so it would be nice if rpmbuild produced all necessary packages automatically. Stepping back though, do we expect that kernel-firmware is necessary on every arch? Looking through the file list, this looks like firmware for x86* only. Why the hard dependency on a package most other arches will never need? The kernel is a special case -- it's built for 'noarch' in addition to the binary architectures. It is the noarch build which produces the kernel-doc and kernel-firmware packages. The contents of the kernel-firmware package are not only for x86*. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 10 development cycle. Changing version to '10'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping I did rpmbuild --target noarch, and on s390x there was no kernel-firmware package built. If the contents of kernel-firmware aren't for x86 only, then can we maintain a list of arches where firmware doesn't apply? (starting with s390x) (In reply to comment #13) > I did rpmbuild --target noarch, and on s390x there was no kernel-firmware > package built. What did get built? Sorry, lost my test system. I believe this has been worked out in F11, or it's not an issue any more. Closing. |