https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 --- Comment #6 from Tomas Heinrich <theinric@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Richard W.M. Jones from comment #4) Thanks for the comments. > In this very specific instance (but not in OCaml libraries in > general) the ocaml-config-file package contains only bytecode. > However we have found in the past that bytecode isn't completely > non-arch-specific, so I'd be very dubious about making the > subpackage noarch. It would require you to build on arm/x86/x86-64 > and then manually compare the files to check there are really > no differences. > > The -devel subpackage has a *.cmxs file which is really a shared > library of native code, so that's certainly not noarch. > > I would not advise making either subpackage noarch. OK, just want to have this documented here. > > > rpms/x86_64/ocaml-config-file-debuginfo-1.2-2.fc22.x86_64.rpm > > > ocaml-config-file-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources > > > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. > > > > Can't really say why this one is happening. > > Have you got the filelist handy? Since OCaml 4, the compiler > supports fairly good DWARF generation, but our debuginfo > tooling doesn't think *.ml is a source file. $ rpm -qlp rpms/x86_64/ocaml-config-file-debuginfo-1.2-2.fc22.x86_64.rpm /usr/lib/debug /usr/lib/debug/.build-id /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/49 /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/49/e2bfe8f16e0685485f0c8fa717cc2a8b61feb1 /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/49/e2bfe8f16e0685485f0c8fa717cc2a8b61feb1.debug /usr/lib/debug/usr /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64 /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/ocaml /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/ocaml/config-file /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/ocaml/config-file/config_file.cmxs.debug $ find build/config-file-1.2/ | sort <...> build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmi build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmo build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmx build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmxs build/config-file-1.2/config_file.ml build/config-file-1.2/config_file.mli build/config-file-1.2/config_file.o build/config-file-1.2/config_file_parser.ml4 build/config-file-1.2/debugfiles.list build/config-file-1.2/debuglinks.list build/config-file-1.2/debugsources.list build/config-file-1.2/elfbins.list build/config-file-1.2/example.ml <...> > Also you may have to change the invocation of ocamlc & ocamlopt > to pass -g everywhere. Typically upstream OCaml packages > don't do this consistently. If you're not passing -g to > everything, then you'll end up with empty/broken debuginfo > which might be what's happening here. Looking at the Makefile, I guess it would have to be patched to pass "-g" everywhere. > > Looks benign, but I guess it won't hurt to add an explicit --libdir=... > > It depends if the configure script supplied by upstream is a > real autotools configure, or something else. It might choke > on --libdir. Checked the configure script and tried a buildrun with the flag, didn't notice any issues. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review