On 12/18/2012 06:24 AM, John Pye wrote:
Hi Toshi, and thanks for your suggestions:
On 18/12/12 15:35, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 02:15:14PM +1100, John Pye wrote:
Can anyone set me straight on what is going on here? (One thing that
I notice is that shared libraries in Ubuntu use 644 mode, but Fedora
17 uses 755. But I believe I've corrected for that using %defattr.
What happens if you use chmod 0755 %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/lib*so*
in %install ? I haven't checked recently but traditionally, the provides
and requires scripts only checked shared libraries that were mode 0755.
This was the right solution. Indeed, the 'find-provides' or 'rpmdeps'
stuff only works if the shared library .so files are installed with the
executable bit set. It's *not* enough to use '%defattr' in the %files
section(s).
I couldn't find this fact mentioned ANYWHERE in the documentation,
Likely, because people have been taking it for granted, because it's the
default everywhere (except on Debian'sh systems) for ages ;)
FWIW,
and it's especially a concern/difficulty since this +x marking is
different from the practice on Debian systems.
Right. It's a historic convention, which AFAICT predates Linux and which
once was technically necessary. Debian has abandoned it, RH/Fedora and
many others distros and OSes haven't.
/usr/bin/env that I am surprised by)
This likely means that you're installing a script somewhere that has
/usr/bin/env in its shebang line that rpm is finding.
Actually what was happening here is that I have a 'freesteam-config'
script that starts with "#!/usr/bin/env python". Should I ideally change
that script to start with #!/usr/bin/python,
Yes. This is the favored approach.
or is the /usr/bin/env
approach considered acceptable,
No.
and I just add "Requires: python" for
the devel package instead?
No.
Ralf
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
