Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libhugetlbfs - easy access to huge pages of memory https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196057 ------- Additional Comments From jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-21 14:27 EST ------- Okay, everything compiles on x86_64, but the package blows up. First, the ldscripts directory isn't getting set to what the %files section expects. I'd recommend possibly the following Makefile change: --- libhugetlbfs-20060621.orig/Makefile 2006-06-21 11:00:26.000000000 -0400 +++ libhugetlbfs-20060621/Makefile 2006-06-21 14:27:05.000000000 -0400 @@ -20,16 +20,19 @@ ELF64 = elf64ppc LIB32 = lib LIB64 = lib64 +BASELIB = $(LIB64) else ifeq ($(ARCH),ppc) CC32 = gcc ELF32 = elf32ppclinux LIB32 = lib +BASELIB = $(LIB32) else ifeq ($(ARCH),i386) CC32 = gcc ELF32 = elf_i386 LIB32 = lib +BASELIB = $(LIB32) else ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64) CC32 = gcc -m32 @@ -38,6 +41,7 @@ ELF64 = elf_x86_64 LIB32 = lib LIB64 = lib64 +BASELIB = $(LIB64) endif endif endif @@ -52,7 +56,7 @@ LIBDIR32 = $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/$(LIB32) LIBDIR64 = $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/$(LIB64) -LDSCRIPTDIR = $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/$(LIB32)/ldscripts +LDSCRIPTDIR = $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/$(BASELIB)/ldscripts BINDIR = $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/bin DOCDIR = $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/share/doc/libhugetlbfs This change puts ldscripts where x86_64 expects them, but all the 32-bit components are still getting built and installed where rpm isn't expecting them: RPM build errors: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs.a /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs.so /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/alloc-instantiate-race /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/chunk-overcommit /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/dummy /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/empty_mounts /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/find_path /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/gethugepagesize /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/icache-hygeine /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/linkhuge /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/linkhuge_nofd /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/linkshare /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/malloc /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/malloc_manysmall /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/meminfo_nohuge /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/mlock /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/mmap-cow /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/mmap-gettest /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/mprotect /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/private /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/ptrace-write-hugepage /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/readback /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/shared /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/shm-fork /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/shm-getraw /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/shm-gettest /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/slbpacaflush /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/test_root /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/truncate /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/unlinked_fd /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/xB.linkhuge /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/xB.linkhuge_nofd /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/xB.linkshare /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/xBDT.linkhuge /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/xBDT.linkhuge_nofd /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/xBDT.linkshare /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/obj32/zero_filesize_segment /usr/lib/libhugetlbfs/tests/run_tests.sh It looks like what we'd really like to do for Fedora Extras is have only the 64-bit pieces built for the x86_64 package, and the 32-bit pieces built in the i386 package, but then make both available in the x86_64 tree, so what do you think about another Makefile target that builds only the platform's native binaries? We could kludge around it by using %exclude statements in the spec file as well, but a rh-install target seems cleaner. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review