Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919948 Omair Majid <omajid@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(omajid@xxxxxxxxxx | |) | --- Comment #3 from Omair Majid <omajid@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Spec URL: http://omajid.fedorapeople.org/java-1.8.0-openjdk/java-1.8.0-openjdk.spec SRPM URL: http://omajid.fedorapeople.org/java-1.8.0-openjdk/java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.0-0.1.b79.fc17.src.rpm In case anyone cares, the contents of the dist-git repo will be based on the contents of: https://github.com/omajid/java-1.8.0-openjdk (In reply to comment #2) > What I'm a little worried about is the invalid-url warnings. See also below. Sorry about that. Most of these tarballs are generated. I have added scripts to generate each of the 4 tarballs now used. > The patches are applied, this could be cleaned up some thanks to some > upstream build changes (patches applied in build section due to upstream > constraints up to 1.7.x can probably now be applied in setup) but this is > not a blocker IMO. Fixed. All patches are now applied in the %prep section. > [!] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, > as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as > it is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL > can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for > how to deal with this[4]. > > As noted above, invalid-URL warnings on several sources. Please either > provide working URL or comment providing instructions for reproducing > upstream tarballs. There are now two scripts (generate_source_tarball.sh and generate_tarballs.sh) which generate all the tarballs. Comments in spec file now refer to the scripts at the right time. > 1. Only one blocking issue from the comments above, the source bundles > without proper URL or repository or other information. Please see the comments above. > 2. There are file conflicts when trying to install from scratch build: > # rpm -ivf java-1.8.0-openjdk-* > Preparing packages... > file /usr/share/systemtap/tapset/x86_64/hotspot-1.7.0.stp from install of > java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.8.0.0-b79.fc19.1.x86_64 conflicts with file > from package java-1.7.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.7.0.9-2.3.7.0.fc19.x86_64 > file /usr/share/systemtap/tapset/x86_64/hotspot_jni-1.7.0.stp from install > of java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.8.0.0-b79.fc19.1.x86_64 conflicts with file > from package java-1.7.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.7.0.9-2.3.7.0.fc19.x86_64 > file /usr/share/systemtap/tapset/x86_64/jstack-1.7.0.stp from install of > java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.8.0.0-b79.fc19.1.x86_64 conflicts with file > from package java-1.7.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.7.0.9-2.3.7.0.fc19.x86_64 > > It might be enough to just install the files with obvious rename. It does > look like the files are pointing to the correct (1.8.0) libjvm.so. Yeah, I had to rename the files correctly. > 2. I'm not sure if this is intentional: > > $ /usr/lib/jvm/jre-1.8.0/bin/java -version > openjdk version "1.8.0-internal" > OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0-internal-0) > OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.0-b20-internal, mixed mode) > > "internal"? I'm not sure what that means. As a tech preview this is > probably not a big deal, but in case it's not on purpose I thought I'd > mention it. "internal" is what the default build assumes is the version for any OpenJDK build. I can tweak this, but not sure what a good (pre-release) version is. Suggestions? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=bpRSf7Gjit&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review