Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561448 Mohammed Morsi <mmorsi@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(mmorsi@xxxxxxxxxx | |) | --- Comment #7 from Mohammed Morsi <mmorsi@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-03-08 15:32:06 EST --- Sorry for the delay, alot of things in the work queue. (In reply to comment #5) > For -2: > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > B Even after -Werror is removed, build fails on ppc64: > > > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1997040 > > > The failing command is: > > > Well, -m32 is wrong for ppc64. This is because {jni/libtest}/GNUmakefile > > > does not check if the arch is ppc64 or not.... however > > > this check is anyway not needed anyway. > > > > I see the same thing, this isn't a blocker since it builds fine of i686 and > > x86_64 correct? > > * Unless build failure on ppc{,64} cannot really be fixed, please fix. > - For the issue that -m32 is passed on ppc64, adding > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > sed -i.cpu -e '/m\$(MODEL)/d' \ > jni/GNUmakefile libtest/GNUmakefile > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > at %prep is enough. > > ! Note > Unless you create ppc{,64} packages, we will have to write "Exclude: ppc > pp64" > declaration on all packages which depend on jffi, which is really not > desired > unless this is really unavoidable.' I'm having trouble getting it to build in a ppc mock / koji environment in the first place. The link to your koji build doesn't seem available and when I goto run either koji build --scratch --arch-override ppc64 dist-f14 jffi-0.6.5-3.fc12.src.rpm or su - build -c "mock -r fedora-devel-ppc /tmp/jffi-0.6.5-3.fc12.src.rpm " Neither is successful. In the case of Koji, I get "BuildError: No matching arches were found" I've submitted packages and seen them submitted that don't build on ppc w/out any fuss, I think they get pushed to the architectures they work on and that have all required dependencies, the others are just ignored. > > > > * Test > > > - Forgot to mention this, however please check if some test programs > > > are available or not (as this package contains test/ directory) > > > > > > > Package now includes a check section which runs the test suite. All tests run > > fine. > * Well, unfortunately test fails on ppc{,64}, I don't know why, > need to remove test/ directory on ppc{,64}. > > > > * Empty debuginfo > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > jffi-debuginfo.i686: E: debuginfo-without-sources > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - Well, I don't know how Java packages treat this by default, > > > however generally to create debuginfo rpm corretly, libjffi-0.6.so > > > should not be stripped in build process itself and should > > > be handled by find-debuginfo.sh and so on. > > > > I'm not getting this error. Instead I get > > > > W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/jffi/libjffi-0.6.so > > - Did you try rpmlint on -debuginfo rpm? (by the way, is redhat-rpm-config > rpm correctly installed?) Ah I was missing that package. Thanks for the tip. > > > Removing the call to "strip" in the makefile and marking the shared object as > > executable does not seem to generate the debuginfo package as detailed online. > > - It does create debuginfo rpm > (well, actually as I did not want to check where strip is used in detail, > I used: > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > mkdir -p BIN > cd BIN > ln -sf /bin/true strip > cd .. > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > at %prep and after that I added > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > export PATH=$(pwd)/BIN:$PATH > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > to add %prep, %build, %install > > > Unless you know of the fix, I'm leaving this as is as there seem to be other > > packages that have been approved / accepted in lieu of this warning. > > - Unfortunately I am not going to approve any packages unless debuginfo > rpm issue is properly handled. Done. The first patch replaces 'strip' w/ /bin/true, taking care of this error. > ! Note > With debuginfo rpm correctly created, rpmlint warns like: > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > jffi-debuginfo.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm > /usr/src/debug/wmeissner-jffi-bbb81f1/jni/jffi/jffi.h > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Please execute > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > chmod 0644 jni/jffi/jffi.h > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > at %prep > Done. > By the way scratch build result for jffi srpm which I slightly modify > to address ppc{,64} build issue / debuginfo rpm creation issue can > be downloaded from: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/mtasaka/task_2012055/ > ( srpm also there ) Link doesn't seem to work. > > Also some other notes: > * build-jar-repository at %prep > - Usually %prep should be for only expanding source, patching / modifying > source and so on, so maybe it is better that > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > mkdir lib/build_lib > build-jar-repository -s -p lib/build_lib junit junit4 > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > lines should be moved to %build. Done. Update spec and srpm: Spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jffi.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jffi-0.6.5-3.fc12.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review