On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 06:01:56AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 03:51:12PM -0600, Paul Johnson wrote: > > 2008/2/10 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 11:44:18AM -0600, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > On 2/10/08, Tony Earnshaw <tonni@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > rpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx skrev, on 10-02-2008 12:46: > > > > > > > > > > > I'm trying to rebuild some src rpms that I d/l'ed from atrpms. > > > > > > > > > > > > Their spec files have a "%kmdl" directive in them. > > > > > > > > > > > > how might I handle this ? > > > > > > Install atrpms-rpm-config. As well as any kernel headers/sources you > > > need to build kmdls for. > > > > > > > I've run into this many times. My solution is avoid ATRPMs at all > > > > cost. AT created his own rpm macro scheme and unless you install his > > > > devel packages, you will have trouble. So I avoid them. > > > > > > What's wrong with defining macros? Nowadays even cmake defines its own > > > macros (nothing against cmake or its macros), and a more complex setup > > > like kernel modules is in need for abstaction even more so. > > > -- > > > > What's wrong? One needs to install your package of macros on every > > machine on which rpms are to be created. In a fast moving environment > > where one is managing a lot of different kinds of rpm systems (some > > Fedora, Scientifc Linux, some RedHat of various generations), it is > > easiest to rely on the default macros that work all of the time to > > build RPMs. On some systems, I don't have root permissions, and can > > build RPMs in my account. I forgot to add that contrary to any other BR you may have the atrpms-rpm-config package does not need to be "installed" on a root level. If you can't install the package, you can still copy its contents into ~/.rpmmacros. So in comparison to a BuildRequires: foo-devel which is not pre-installed in your setups you don't actually need root permission to apply the macros, e.g. a less severe situation than when dealing with truly missing BRs on (ch)roots you cannot alter. And BTW2 I'm the first to welcome atrpms-rpm-config to become part of the standard Fedora/RHEL setup. In fact that was the reason I was in the FPC for quite a long time now (well, ever since it was created). > If you don't have permission to alter the contents of a build > (ch)root, then you have many problems with building rpms where any BR > has not been installed for you in advance. Especially your own rpms > that other rpms of yours may be depdending on. > > > The ATrpms config package can't be installed there, and I'm totally > > dead in the water. Sometimes people allow me to log into their > > systems as a user and build a package for other people who have that > > same system, but I can't install special macros on those systems > > just to build an RPM. And I do perfectly fine RPMS with the > > standard macros. I have trouble not only with ATrpms, but also > > Mandriva and SUSE for this reason. > > You will also have trouble if the systems in question require BR that > have not been preinstalled or that you have to build yourself. Just as > you will have to ask the users/admins for permissions to do so in > those cases you woould have to do so with the atrpms-rpm-config > package. > > Or you need a non-root build system which may be released soon on > rpmrepo.org. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpoKVORS0gVC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
