Opened 4 years ago

Closed 4 years ago

#79 closed defect (fixed)

Errors when building survex RPM for fedora

Reported by: jmbegley Owned by: Olly Betts
Priority: minor Milestone: 1.2.26
Component: Other Version: 1.2.25
Keywords: survex rpm Cc:

Description

There are 2 errors with the survex.spec file when attempting to build a RPM for fedora 23. These are:

1) The survex mime file has moved from /usr/share/mime/survex* to /usr/share/mime/packages/survex.xml so the %files section of the spec file needs updating, and

2) Fedora 23 has upgraded to RPM version 4.13, which is fussier about empty package files. By default an empty 'survex-debug' package will be built, which will now cause the rpmbuild process to fail. Google suggests that the 'fix' for this is to include

# workaround for rpm 4.13 %define _empty_manifest_terminate_build 0

in the spec file - I just added this before the %description section and the build then worked fine.

Cheers, James

Change History (5)

comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by Olly Betts

Status: newassigned

If you change:

make install-strip DESTDIR="%{buildroot}"

to

make install DESTDIR="%{buildroot}"

does that give you a more useful survex-debug package?

comment:2 Changed 4 years ago by jmbegley

Yep, that works as well (in that it creates an empty debug RPM, instead of failing to build at all).

comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by Olly Betts

Is that with the %define _empty_manifest_terminate_build 0 workaround or without it?

comment:4 Changed 4 years ago by jmbegley

Without it.

Using the original spec file (without either workaround) the rpm build process generated an empty list of files to include in the -debug package and then failed.

With the _empty_manifest_terminate_build workaround, the rpm build process ignored this error and carried on (and appears to have generated an empty -debug package).

With the change above (and without the other workaround), the rpm build process happily generated a list of files to include and the decided that there was no debug information within them, and thus also generated an empty -debug package.

comment:5 Changed 4 years ago by Olly Betts

Resolution: fixed
Status: assignedclosed

Thanks for clarifying.

Not sure why it doesn't find debug symbols, but let's go with removing the -strip as that seems to more directly address the problem, even if it doesn't actually result in debug symbols in the -debug package.

Fixed in [129a061ea02b7790c593588b6b701bbc6c0eeb25/git].

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.