On 10/28/16 11:11 AM, Jarod Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 03:10:59PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:33:57AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: >>> Url: http://openfabrics.org/ >> >> I guess we should change this url to >> https://github.com/linux-rdma/rdma-core ? > > Either one works for me. We should get the github url in. >>> Source: rdma-core-%{version}.tgz >>> -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root >>> +# https://github.com/linux-rdma/rdma-core >>> +BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) >> >> I always wondered why there was so much variability in spec files >> here.. I followed the Fedora guidelines, should we copy the above into >> the other spec file? > > I believe the current Fedora guidelines actually say "just omit > BuildRoot", because rpm will figure out a sane default by itself. The one > with mktemp was introduced by the security-conscious/paranoid, I just > copied it over from another of the specs I was merging together here, not > sure what the "best" route is here now. We won't be putting this anywhere that requires the buildroot be specified, so I would leave it out. >>> +%package -n librdmacm-utils >>> +Summary: Examples for the librdmacm library >>> +Requires: librdmacm%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} >> >> Why the requires? Shouldn't auto shlib dependencies take care of that? > > Probably. I think this was another legacy bit copied over from a > stand-alone spec file. Actually, no. When you have a -utils package that goes with a library package, standard procedure is to tie them directly like this. The auto dependency stuff will allow, say, librdmacm-1.1.17-1 and librdmacm-utils-1.1.16-1 to happily satisfy each other since the later librdmacm provides all of the sonames and apis that the -utils package needs. This is as designed as you want a librdamcm update to not trigger a required update of, say, openmpi, unless there is truly a change that requires it. But, for the utils that go with the library, even though we don't *have* to update them with the library, we want that to happen automatically, so the explicit requires makes that happen even if librdmacm-utils was excluded from the update command. -- Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx> GPG Key ID: 0E572FDD Red Hat, Inc. 100 E. Davie St Raleigh, NC 27601 USA
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
