Alessandro De Salvo [Alessandro.DeSalvo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] wrote: > OK, I think we are now closer to the end of the story. > Recompiling with your instructions, and slightly changing the release name to match the convention in epel, the new RPMS produce something working! > So it means essentially that: > > 1) the RPMS in epel are broken, they should really be fixed; > 2) the RPMS, produced by exporting the tarball from git, even by selecting the correct branch, and the spec file from epel are broken as well; What does this mean? Just the spec file in epel is broken. > 3) following your procedure produce working packages, but with revision “0.3” instead of the required “3” (not a real problem, easy to fix). Yeah, it produces 2.2.0-0.3 instead of 2.2.0-3 that we wanted. A patch is welcome to fix this! What you have just tested is the latest V2.2-stable which is 2.2.0-3. The epel code is probably from V2.2.0 code. So either EPEL has a broken spec file or V2.2.0 is broken. Can someone from redhat figure this out and fix epel repo please. Regards, Malahal. _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
