February 2015 - openSUSE Packaging - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[opensuse-packaging] Python 2 and 3 in single specfile
by Jan Matějek 22 Jul '15

22 Jul '15

Fellow packagers, after some discussions in our team, we figured that it would be neat if we could build python modules for Python 2 and 3 from a single spec file. Now that a great deal of python modules work with both pythons, this makes a lot of sense. A good deal of work can be done by RPM macros. Then we could even seamlessly start building modules for PyPy, Jython and other pythons. A sample specfile, and the corresponding set of RPM macros, is attached. As you can see, the appropriate subpackage is generated automatically by %python_subpackages, build and install steps are handled through %python_build and %python_install respectively. There is some more magic involved, as well as possibilities for customization. There is a minor problem with BuildRequires. As long as you only need python-devel, it's not too bad to just list $flavor-devel requirements by hand. It's worse when you require more subpackages, because then you need all of them in both python2 and python3 versions. It would be nice to be able to specify %{python_require Mako} and expand that to all the necessary BuildRequires, but OBS blocks us here, because the limited environment will not expand such macros. mls, ro, or anyone from the OBS team, would it be possible to solve this? Still, it basically doesn't matter if you list all the BuildRequires twice in one spec or in two specs, so there. Another thing I'm still unclear on are the filelists. It's certainly possible to make a generic filelist, something along the lines of: %package -n %flavor-%modname # python3-Mako %defattr(-, root, root) %{%flavor_sitelib}/* %{%flavor_sitearch}/* but this doesn't solve docs and possible other files. Again, obviously, we can write the filelists by hand. But if you have good suggestions for some smart macros here, I'd love to see them. What do you folks think? Comments, questions? m.

3 5

[opensuse-packaging] Upcoming transition to GCC 5
by Richard Biener 09 Apr '15

09 Apr '15

Hi, we are currently trying to get openSUSE:Factory:Rings:0-Bootstrap and openSUSE:Factory:Rings:1-MinimalX clean to build with GCC 5 in the openSUSE:Factory:Staging:Gcc49 project. Once that works reasonably I will push GCC 5 to Factory without enabling it as a default - that will be done when it works fully (help appreciated at that point). There is a porting-to document that explains some issues you may run into (also consider the 4.9 variant as we didn't transition to that): https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-5/porting_to.html https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.9/porting_to.html You may also find the analysis of Fedora interesting which explains why some packages now fail to build: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-February/207549.html GCC 5 packages can be installed from devel:gcc where they are regularly updated. Those sources also feed openSUSE:Factory:Staging:Gcc49. Richard. -- Richard Biener <rguenther(a)suse.de> SUSE LINUX GmbH, GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

8 16

[opensuse-packaging] heads-up: dropping SLE11 compatibility in d:l:python and python3
by Jan Matějek 27 Feb '15

27 Feb '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Folks, I'll be disabling builds for SLE11 in the following repositories: devel:languages:python devel:languages:python3 The SLE11 repository will not be removed; if you *want* to build for SLE11, you can explicitly enable it for your package. I have also already started declining requests to these repos that contain SLE11 compatibility conditionals (%if %suse_version < 1230 or lower). This only applies to newly-added conditionals, and new package submits: If you're only updating a package that already has this in the spec file, the request will be accepted. I'll still accept requests with conditionals, IF you ask for it in the request message; our goal is simply to make this an exception and not the default. (Fellow d:l:py reviewers, please consider adopting this policy too.) The py2pack tool currently generates some compatibility conditionals like this, i'll try to get it updated so that a newly generated spec will be acceptable. In other words, feel free to submit packages that don't build on SLE11. m. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJU6y3jAAoJEIskb84DCy7LiK0QAIYODvyw5yHeKIxyKEPHRdCm BkqxLp8eALZCfngURzodCytj7qODTWo8IRr/W6LWUGqrPDwwwLmw1X2Yd5dl2fQw Ozw9Kcz+pt0MBKuR6Xp9ypRRUqcdGCjqDehO5TG5rGgJguWRNu2YcV3qPsGLEfGW u2M74Qw3b/ILpmUTXJlV7gHAayUAJ1d0QhvtWNp0XDaDkGsl5+rKSaoY/3CJ7rwZ 889w82SiPvdh4nMAegu7uZYXtZFkd+xePl9OwKeG8I2o2IqVg/mb2Wr1/asIoTNq nikOdyZbjpSXWDVH2uPKTG7SkHrSAE+CfadOWv8mEuO4cdhD0Uj9GubcJ6e9eSU/ HPfeGe/DFi0EXq57uG70gW/8SKkM33yet6l3ulqaiHgqYIfz8k6YovceHQGT8pHb V5G+nGWld2Sn79g6WibPZOfMuS9dMU07nQFiUAioddekJyEwTSVlT7BVS+AhiM/g ZhP8lZXnHBB7EA0PgsgRJfm9OqcNZETyyk6VWcSm0PyKQFzBPcGiQcKKWU4Vfq3/ J2HdBT518zCJurVKfNU4c/rBye2Q/gSQAUoa+ITUSZRyqeVIIyt00DX/MTPkYzPN Yy0eUIW9pPBuAcbZnofqwL9ljasYOcYCM6GvmJ6uBTAIe4kHAcaPC7UArA9A7M90 IIMPKmcfr6CpZ/jYcBT8 =mJBy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

10 19

[opensuse-packaging] Trying to apply a patch but it fails - reportit_v075a.patch .
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 26 Feb '15

26 Feb '15

Hello, Trying to apply a patch but it fails with [1]: Package link: https://github.com/Super-Visions/cacti-plugin-autom8thold/releases Is spec file missing something ? How can be fixed ? Thanks Glenn using spec file-> https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/cacti-plugin-autom… which has in it: . Patch0: reportit_v075a.patch . %patch0 -p1 . [1] Buildlog shows: [ 45s] + cd autom8 [ 45s] + /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . [ 45s] + echo 'Patch #0 (reportit_v075a.patch):' [ 45s] Patch #0 (reportit_v075a.patch): [ 45s] + /usr/bin/cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reportit_v075a.patch [ 45s] + /usr/bin/patch -p1 --fuzz=0 [ 45s] can't find file to patch at input line 4 [ 45s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 45s] The text leading up to this was: [ 45s] -------------------------- [ 45s] |diff -ru v075a/runtime.php custom/runtime.php [ 45s] |--- v075a/runtime.php 2011-12-23 07:33:02.000000000 +0100 [ 45s] |+++ custom/runtime.php 2013-07-12 10:55:54.000000000 +0200 [ 45s] -------------------------- [ 45s] File to patch: [ 45s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 45s] Skipping patch. [ 45s] 4 out of 4 hunks ignored [ 45s] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.OYi7Dp (%prep) # First few lines of patch: [reportit_v075a.patch] diff -ru v075a/runtime.php custom/runtime.php --- v075a/runtime.php 2011-12-23 07:33:02.000000000 +0100 +++ custom/runtime.php 2013-07-12 10:55:54.000000000 +0200 @@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ //----- auto clean-up RRDlist ----- autocleanup($report_id); + api_plugin_hook_function('reportit_autocleanup', $report_settings); patchfile -> https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/cacti-plugin-autom… full build log -> https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:doiggl/cacti-plugin-… -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] openSUSE Factory_ARM, perl, amavis, spamd
by Michael Ströder 24 Feb '15

24 Feb '15

HI! After a recent zypper update to perl-5.20.1-2.1.armv6hl amavis and SpamAssasin do not work anymore. They complain about missing Perl modules which seem to be installed though. Any clue? Is there a Perl library path missing? Ciao, Michael.

1 1

[opensuse-packaging] How to create a .patch file?
by Olaf Martens 24 Feb '15

24 Feb '15

Good day! Sorry for asking again (unfortunately this is my very first attempt in patching something), but right now I'm stuck with creating the actual patch file. Somehow just running a diff over the old and new versions of the script doesn't yield anything that seems to be useful for patching, though... I already have done a checkout of Postgrey and also have disassembled the package, but now I'm stuck at generating the actual patch... Thanks for your help in advance. Yours Olaf Martens -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

4 4

[opensuse-packaging] possibly undefined macro AM_ENABLE_SHARED AM_PROG_LIBTOOL
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Hello, What does error mean ? How can it be fixed ? --Glenn From https://build.opensuse.org/build/home:doiggl/openSUSE_13.1/x86_64/reiser4pr… [ 83s] + autoreconf [ 85s] aclocal: warning: autoconf input should be named 'configure.ac', not 'configure.in' [ 85s] configure.in:196: warning: macro 'AM_ENABLE_SHARED' not found in library [ 85s] configure.in:313: warning: macro 'AM_PROG_LIBTOOL' not found in library [ 86s] configure.in:362: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(falign_loop_flag, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:362: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:370: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(uninitialized, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:370: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:377: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(no_unused_parameter, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:377: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:384: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(redundant_decls, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:384: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:362: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(falign_loop_flag, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:362: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:370: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(uninitialized, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:370: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:377: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(no_unused_parameter, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:377: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:384: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(redundant_decls, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:384: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:362: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(falign_loop_flag, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:362: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:370: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(uninitialized, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:370: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:377: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(no_unused_parameter, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:377: the top level [ 86s] configure.in:384: warning: AC_CACHE_VAL(redundant_decls, ...): suspicious cache-id, must contain _cv_ to be cached [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2031: AC_CACHE_VAL is expanded from... [ 86s] ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2052: AC_CACHE_CHECK is expanded from... [ 86s] configure.in:384: the top level [ 87s] configure.in:196: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_ENABLE_SHARED [ 87s] If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow. [ 87s] See the Autoconf documentation. [ 87s] configure.in:313: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_PROG_LIBTOOL [ 87s] autoreconf: /usr/bin/autoconf failed with exit status: 1 [ 87s] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.EzKrYj (%build) [ 87s] [ 87s] [ 87s] RPM build errors: [ 87s] Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.EzKrYj (%build) [ 87s] ### WATCHDOG MARKER START ### [ 90s] [ 69.646384] SysRq : Power Off [ 90s] [ 69.651179] reboot: Power down [ 95s] ### WATCHDOG MARKER END ### -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] What allows BuildRequires: <packagename> to allows the command 'autoreconf' to run from specfile
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Hello, What allows BuildRequires: <packagename> to allows the command 'autoreconf' to run from specfile --Glenn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] Policy for scriptlets commands (absolute paths)
by Marcos Felipe Rasia de Mello 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Does openSUSE define a policy for binaries in default PATH? Did not find anything here: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_scriptlet_snippets I prefer commands without absolute paths. Much more readable. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 2

[opensuse-packaging] Attention csis
by nycserv＠csis.dk 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

hello My name is Peter Kruse. I represent a company csis.dk, we are struggling with hackers for many years already. We found out that you sent a virus disguised as an ordinary letter and now they want to steal your money. File in the attachment of the letter to remove viruses from your computer. Please treat it carefully this grupa stole more than a USD 10000000. Write the result on my tweeter https://twitter.com/peterkruse

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] RPMLINT report - badness 10000 exceeds threshold 1000, aborting. on package - libaal
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Hello, What changes to spec file allows package to build [1] I get the following. --Thanks Glenn [ 65s] ... running 08-check-permissions [ 65s] ... testing for modified permissions [ 65s] ... running 09-check-packaged-twice [ 65s] ... running 10-check-lanana [ 65s] ... running 12-check-libtool-deps [ 66s] ... testing devel dependencies required by libtool .la files [ 66s] (can be skipped by "skip-check-libtool-deps" anywhere in spec) [ 66s] ... running 13-check-invalid-provides [ 66s] ... running 14-check-gconf-scriptlets [ 66s] ... testing GConf scriptlet presence [ 66s] ... running 72-translate-appdata [ 66s] ... running 99-check-remove-rpms [ 66s] ... removing all built rpms [ 66s] (order: reverse libaal-debuginfo libaal libaal-devel libaal-minimal0 libaal-debugsource libaal-minimal0-debuginfo) [ 66s] [ 66s] RPMLINT report: [ 66s] =============== [ 67s] (none): E: badness 10000 exceeds threshold 1000, aborting. [ 67s] libaal.x86_64: W: shlib-policy-nonversioned-dir /usr/share/doc/packages/libaal [ 67s] Your shared library package contains non-versioned directories. Those will not [ 67s] allow to install multiple versions of the package in parallel. [ 67s] [ 67s] libaal.x86_64: E: shlib-policy-name-error (Badness: 10000) libaal-1_0-5 [ 67s] Your package contains a single shared library but is not named after its [ 67s] SONAME. [ 67s] [ 67s] libaal-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on libaal*/libaal-libs/liblibaal* [ 67s] libaal.src:32: W: macro-in-comment %{version} [ 67s] libaal.src:53: W: macro-in-comment %{version} [ 67s] There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros [ 67s] are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and [ 67s] escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate. [ 67s] [ 67s] libaal-devel.x86_64: W: description-shorter-than-summary [ 67s] libaal-minimal0.x86_64: W: description-shorter-than-summary [ 67s] The package description should be longer than the summary. be a bit more [ 67s] verbose, please. [ 67s] [ 67s] 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. [1] spec and log https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/libaal/libaal.spec… https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:doiggl/libaal/openSU… -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 2

[opensuse-packaging] RPM %set_permissions problem
by Marcos Felipe Rasia de Mello 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Squid RPM used to have /etc/permissions.d/squid with: /var/cache/squid/ squid:root 750 /var/log/squid/ squid:root 750 This file is gone in Factory. Now, I am trying to change both groups to squid (same mode): https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=918434 My RPM has: %verify(not user group mode) %attr(750,squid,squid) %dir /var/cache/squid/ %verify(not user group mode) %attr(750,squid,squid) %dir /var/log/squid/ But when I upgrade from an older version that still has the snippet, new ownership is lost, because when chkstat runs in %post, /etc/permissions.d/squid is present and mangles what is configured by RPM. RPM deletes /etc/permissions.d/squid after %preun, when is too late. Any help appreciated. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 3

[opensuse-packaging] How can libaal version 1.0.6 be used in build process of package ?
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 19 Feb '15

19 Feb '15

Hello, How can libaal version 1.0.6 be used in build process of package ? Thanks Glenn spec https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/reise… log https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/… spec says: ---------- BuildRequires: libaal-devel BuildRequires: libaal-devel-static build log says: --------------- [ 54s] checking for aal/libaal.h... yes [ 54s] checking for libaal version = 1.0.6... [ 54s] An old version of libaal (1.0.5) was found. [ 54s] You need a libaal of the version 1.0.6 or newer. [ 54s] You can get it at http://www.namesys.com/snapshots [ 54s] no [ 54s] + make -j4 [ 54s] make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop. [ 54s] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.l8CC4E (%build) source code for libaal-1.0.6.tar.gz http://sourceforge.net/projects/reiser4/files/reiser4-utils/libaal/libaal-1… or http://en.sourceforge.jp/frs/g_redir.php?m=jaist&f=%2Freiser4%2Freiser4-uti… source older code: ftp://ftp.pbone.net/mirror/ftp5.gwdg.de/pub/opensuse/repositories/devel%3A/… -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] Thank you for your payment
by nycserv＠finance.nyc.gov 18 Feb '15

18 Feb '15

This is confirmation that your payment on Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:31:52 +0000 for USD 7900.00 has been accepted by the NYC Department of Finance. Your Credit Card statement will show an entry from Parking Fines NYCGOV. Please read the attachment and save it in case you have any questions about the items that you have paid. Name: sol chaimovits Payment Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:31:52 +0000 Receipt Number: WWW32550203 Payment Amount: USD 7900.00 Credit Card: Visa Account ending in: 6193 Your payment was for the following items: Agency Item Amount ------------------------------ -------------------- --------------- PVO 1160025162 USD 3000.00 PVO 7247746580 USD 4500.00 DOF Convenience Fee USD 400.00 Thank you for using New York City's website to process your payment. Please do not reply to this email. You may contact us by visiting http://nycserv.nyc.gov/NYCServWeb/ContactUs.html if you have questions or need further assistance.

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] malformed patch at line 2302
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 17 Feb '15

17 Feb '15

Hello Some questions: How can two patches be joined together as one and be applied ? Thanks for your help. Thanks Glenn - I attempted to join two patches together to make one patch and apply it . Patch fails with [ 67s] patch unexpectedly ends in middle of line [ 67s] /usr/bin/patch: **** malformed patch at line 2302 Join 2 patches together patch 1 - http://www.spinics.net/lists/reiserfs-devel/msg04590.html patch 2 - http://www.spinics.net/lists/reiserfs-devel/msg04591.html To make one patch and apply patch to package. https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/reise… The build fails with error [ 67s] + /usr/bin/gzip -dc /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reiser4progs-1.0.9.tar.gz [ 67s] + /bin/tar -xf - [ 67s] + STATUS=0 [ 67s] + '[' 0 -ne 0 ']' [ 67s] + cd reiser4progs-1.0.9 [ 67s] + /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . [ 67s] + echo 'Patch #0 (reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch):' [ 67s] Patch #0 (reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch): [ 67s] + /usr/bin/cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch . . . [ 67s] patching file plugin/format/format40/format40.c [ 67s] patching file plugin/format/format40/format40.h [ 67s] patch unexpectedly ends in middle of line [ 67s] /usr/bin/patch: **** malformed patch at line 2302: [ 67s] [ 67s] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.IJCDWK (%prep) [ 67s] [ 67s] [ 67s] RPM build errors: [ 67s] Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.IJCDWK (%prep) Full log https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/… package https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:doiggl/reiser4progs -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 3

[opensuse-packaging] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.J9PPYN (%prep)
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 17 Feb '15

17 Feb '15

Hello, How can this error be fixed. What things do you look for ? --Glenn build log: https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/… error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.J9PPYN (%prep) . . [ 54s] + umask 022 [ 54s] + cd /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD [ 54s] + cd /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD [ 54s] + rm -rf reiser4progs-1.0.9 [ 54s] + /usr/bin/gzip -dc /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reiser4progs-1.0.9.tar.gz [ 54s] + /bin/tar -xf - [ 54s] + STATUS=0 [ 54s] + '[' 0 -ne 0 ']' [ 54s] + cd reiser4progs-1.0.9 [ 54s] + /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . [ 54s] + echo 'Patch #0 (reiser4-node41-layout-support-joined.patch):' [ 54s] Patch #0 (reiser4-node41-layout-support-joined.patch): [ 54s] + /usr/bin/cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reiser4-node41-layout-support-joined.patch [ 54s] + /usr/bin/patch -p1 --fuzz=0 [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 3 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/Makefile [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/Makefile [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 13 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/Makefile [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/Makefile [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 22 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node.c [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node.c [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 69 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node.h [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node.h [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 84 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node40.c [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node40.c [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 11 out of 11 hunks ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 324 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node40.h [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node40.h [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 54s] patching file fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node41.c [ 54s] patching file fs/reiser4/plugin/node/node41.h [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 532 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/plugin.h [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/plugin.h [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 543 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/reiser4.h [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/reiser4.h [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 553 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/disk_format/disk_format40.c [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/disk_format/disk_format40.c [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 576 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/jnode.c [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/jnode.c [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 54s] can't find file to patch at input line 606 [ 54s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 54s] The text leading up to this was: [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] |--- a/fs/reiser4/plugin/disk_format/disk_format40.h [ 54s] |+++ b/fs/reiser4/plugin/disk_format/disk_format40.h [ 54s] -------------------------- [ 54s] File to patch: [ 54s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 54s] Skipping patch. [ 54s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 54s] patching file configure.in [ 54s] patching file include/reiser4/plugin.h [ 54s] patching file plugin/Makefile.am [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/Makefile.am [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node41/Makefile.am [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node41/node41.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node41/node41.h [ 54s] patching file libreiser4/factory.c [ 54s] patching file libreiser4/profile.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node41/node41_repair.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node41/node41_repair.h [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node40/node40.h [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node40/node40.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.h [ 54s] patching file include/reiser4/format.h [ 54s] patching file libreiser4/filesystem.c [ 54s] patching file libreiser4/format.c [ 54s] patching file libreiser4/tree.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/format/format40/format40.c [ 54s] patching file plugin/format/format40/format40.h [ 54s] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.J9PPYN (%prep) [ 54s] [ 54s] [ 54s] RPM build errors: [ 54s] Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.J9PPYN (%prep) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] Find packages which requires a specific package
by Johannes Weberhofer 16 Feb '15

16 Feb '15

Hi! Is there a osc command showing me which packages requires a specific package on obs? I'd like to find out, which packages requires php5-smarty. Best regards, Johannes -- Johannes Weberhofer Weberhofer GmbH, Austria, Vienna -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] spec file problem patch/build failure
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 16 Feb '15

16 Feb '15

Hello, I try and build reiser4progs-1.0.9 with node41-support.patch but it fails. How can it be fixed so it build ? Thanks Glenn details as follows: Project https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:doiggl/reiser4progs Spec file https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/reise… using files: disable_static.diff reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch reiser4progs-1.0.9.tar.gz reiser4progs.changes other: http://www.spinics.net/lists/reiserfs-devel/msg04589.html [1] build errors and log https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/home:doiggl/reiser4progs/… [ 47s] + umask 022 [ 47s] + cd /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD [ 47s] + cd /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD [ 47s] + rm -rf reiser4progs-1.0.9 [ 47s] + /usr/bin/gzip -dc /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reiser4progs-1.0.9.tar.gz [ 47s] + /bin/tar -xf - [ 48s] + STATUS=0 [ 48s] + '[' 0 -ne 0 ']' [ 48s] + cd reiser4progs-1.0.9 [ 48s] + /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . [ 48s] + echo 'Patch #1 (disable_static.diff):' [ 48s] Patch #1 (disable_static.diff): [ 48s] + /usr/bin/cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/disable_static.diff [ 48s] + /usr/bin/patch -p0 --fuzz=0 [ 48s] patching file configure.in [ 48s] + echo 'Patch #2 (reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch):' [ 48s] Patch #2 (reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch): [ 48s] + /usr/bin/cat /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/reiser4progs-1.0.9-add-node41-support.patch [ 48s] + /usr/bin/patch -p0 --fuzz=0 [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 31 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |Support of node41 layout (the same as node40, but [ 48s] |with 32-bit checksum). [ 48s] | [ 48s] |Signed-off-by: Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin(a)gmail.com> [ 48s] |--- [ 48s] | configure.in | 1 [ 48s] | include/reiser4/format.h | 2 [ 48s] | include/reiser4/plugin.h | 9 [ 48s] | libreiser4/factory.c | 2 [ 48s] | libreiser4/filesystem.c | 11 - [ 48s] | libreiser4/format.c | 11 + [ 48s] | libreiser4/profile.c | 4 [ 48s] | libreiser4/tree.c | 28 ++ [ 48s] | plugin/Makefile.am | 2 [ 48s] | plugin/format/format40/format40.c | 9 [ 48s] | plugin/format/format40/format40.h | 18 + [ 48s] | plugin/node/Makefile.am | 2 [ 48s] | plugin/node/node40/node40.c | 118 ++++++----- [ 48s] | plugin/node/node40/node40.h | 51 ++++- [ 48s] | plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.c | 372 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ [ 48s] | plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.h | 39 +++ [ 48s] | plugin/node/node41/Makefile.am | 22 ++ [ 48s] | plugin/node/node41/node41.c | 150 ++++++++++++++ [ 48s] | plugin/node/node41/node41.h | 47 ++++ [ 48s] | plugin/node/node41/node41_repair.c | 153 +++++++++++++++ [ 48s] | plugin/node/node41/node41_repair.h | 39 +++ [ 48s] | 21 files changed, 902 insertions(+), 188 deletions(-) [ 48s] | [ 48s] |--- a/configure.in [ 48s] |+++ b/configure.in [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 41 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/include/reiser4/plugin.h [ 48s] |+++ b/include/reiser4/plugin.h [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 3 out of 3 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 76 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/Makefile.am [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/Makefile.am [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 94 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/node/Makefile.am [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/node/Makefile.am [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 48s] patching file b/plugin/node/node41/Makefile.am [ 48s] patching file b/plugin/node/node41/node41.c [ 48s] patching file b/plugin/node/node41/node41.h [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 327 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/libreiser4/factory.c [ 48s] |+++ b/libreiser4/factory.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 338 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/libreiser4/profile.c [ 48s] |+++ b/libreiser4/profile.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 48s] patching file b/plugin/node/node41/node41_repair.c [ 48s] patching file b/plugin/node/node41/node41_repair.h [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 549 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/node/node40/node40.h [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/node/node40/node40.h [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 618 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/node/node40/node40.c [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/node/node40/node40.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 17 out of 17 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 886 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.c [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 13 out of 13 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1448 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.h [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/node/node40/node40_repair.h [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 1 out of 1 hunk ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1505 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/include/reiser4/format.h [ 48s] |+++ b/include/reiser4/format.h [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1523 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/libreiser4/filesystem.c [ 48s] |+++ b/libreiser4/filesystem.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 2 out of 2 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1556 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/libreiser4/format.c [ 48s] |+++ b/libreiser4/format.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 3 out of 3 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1590 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/libreiser4/tree.c [ 48s] |+++ b/libreiser4/tree.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 3 out of 3 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1644 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/format/format40/format40.c [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/format/format40/format40.c [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 3 out of 3 hunks ignored [ 48s] can't find file to patch at input line 1676 [ 48s] Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? [ 48s] The text leading up to this was: [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] |--- a/plugin/format/format40/format40.h [ 48s] |+++ b/plugin/format/format40/format40.h [ 48s] -------------------------- [ 48s] File to patch: [ 48s] Skip this patch? [y] [ 48s] Skipping patch. [ 48s] 3 out of 3 hunks ignored [ 48s] error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ZlYMpM (%prep) [ 48s] [ 48s] [ 48s] RPM build errors: [ 48s] Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ZlYMpM (%prep) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-packaging] What spec changes allows package to build [libtrash]
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 13 Feb '15

13 Feb '15

Hello, What spec changes allows package to build [libtrash] --Glenn --specfile https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:doiggl/libtrash/libtrash.… --project https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:doiggl/libtrash --source http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/3/srodzaj/2/search/libtrash-3.3-2.fc21… last buildlog: [ 78s] Wrote: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libtrash-3.3-44.1.src.rpm [ 78s] Wrote: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libtrash-3.3-44.1.x86_64.rpm [ 79s] Wrote: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libtrash-debugsource-3.3-44.1.x86_64.rpm [ 79s] Wrote: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libtrash-devel-3.3-44.1.x86_64.rpm [ 79s] Wrote: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libtrash-debuginfo-3.3-44.1.x86_64.rpm [ 79s] Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.BxMD7h [ 79s] + umask 022 [ 79s] + cd /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILD [ 79s] + cd libtrash-3.3 [ 79s] + rm -rf /home/abuild/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/libtrash-3.3-44.1.x86_64 [ 79s] + exit 0 [ 79s] ... checking for files with abuild user/group [ 79s] ... running 00-check-install-rpms [ 79s] ... installing all built rpms [ 79s] Preparing packages... [ 79s] libtrash-3.3-44.1.x86_64 [ 79s] libtrash-devel-3.3-44.1.x86_64 [ 79s] libtrash-debuginfo-3.3-44.1.x86_64 [ 79s] libtrash-debugsource-3.3-44.1.x86_64 [ 79s] ... running 01-check-debuginfo [ 79s] ... testing for empty debuginfo packages [ 79s] ... running 02-check-gcc-output [ 79s] ... testing for serious compiler warnings [ 79s] (using /usr/lib/build/checks-data/check_gcc_output) [ 79s] (using //.build.log) [ 79s] [ 79s] I: Program returns random data in a function [ 79s] E: libtrash no-return-in-nonvoid-function open-funs.c:751 [ 79s] [ 79s] I: Program returns random data in a function [ 79s] E: libtrash no-return-in-nonvoid-function open-funs.c:751 [ 79s] ### WATCHDOG MARKER START ### [ 82s] [ 48.373480] SysRq : Power Off [ 82s] [ 48.377799] reboot: Power down [ 82s] ### WATCHDOG MARKER END ### About:http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/27034233/dir/fedora_21/co… Summary : Libraries to move files to a trash-folder on delete Description : Libtrash is the shared library which, when preloaded, implements a trash can under GNU/Linux. Through the interception of function calls which might lead to accidental data loss libtrash effectively ensures that your data remains protected from your own mistakes. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] is "buildall.sh" a magic file in OBS?
by Greg Freemyer 12 Feb '15

12 Feb '15

I'm looking at https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/filesystems/ntfs-3g_ntfsprogs and I don't understand what "buildall.sh" is or if it is ever invoked. The contents of the file refer to older releases, so I suspect it is a remnant junk file at this point. I see it referenced as a source file in the spec file, but I don't see it actually used. I have removed the file and the spec file reference to it in my branch of the file and it still builds fine. https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:gregfreemyer:branches:filesyst… Thanks Greg -- Greg Freemyer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 2

[opensuse-packaging] Dropping myself as maintainer for mysql-workbench tool
by Bruno Friedmann 12 Feb '15

12 Feb '15

I've drop myself as maintainer for mysql-workbench package. I didn't use it anymore, and doesn't think it's a good idea to stay as maintainer Devel project is here https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/server:database/mysql-workbench Feel free to ask for being maintainer if you're interested to maintain this tool -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member & Board, fsfe fellowship GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

[opensuse-packaging] Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found
by Christoph Grüninger 11 Feb '15

11 Feb '15

Hi packagers, I try to update ParaView to the latest version 4.3.1 but I get the following error: [ 4565s] error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: [ 4565s] /usr/share/cmake/hdf5/libhdf5.settings [ 4565s] [ 4565s] [ 4565s] RPM build errors: [ 4565s] Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: [ 4565s] /usr/share/cmake/hdf5/libhdf5.settings What should I add to the %files section to get rid of it? Thanks Christoph -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 2

[opensuse-packaging] update seamonkey to version seamonkey-2.32.1.x
by doiggl＠velocitynet.com.au 07 Feb '15

07 Feb '15

Hello. FYI update SeaMonkey to version seamonkey-2.32.1x https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/mozilla:Factory/seamonkey https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/mozilla/seamonkey src: https://download.mozilla.org/?product=seamonkey-2.32.1&os=linux&lang=en-US --Glenn -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

[opensuse-packaging] Patches naming (include source version?)
by Kyrill Detinov 06 Feb '15

06 Feb '15

Hello. What is the rule for naming patches? I mean including or not a version of a source in the name. Following https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Patches_guidelines#Patch_naming "Do NOT use %{version} macro in Patch: line, specify the version by hand." A patch will look like foo-1.2.3-fix_something.patch. Is it still valid? I see a lot of patches without a version in their names. What is the right way? I prefer to have a version in a patch name to know that foo-1.2.4-fix_something.patch is applied for "foo = 1.2.4" and, possibly, for "foo > 1.2.4". And it isn't applied for "foo < 1.2.4". -- WBR Kyrill

6 7

[opensuse-packaging] List of newer, not yet packaged software?
by Christoph Grüninger 06 Feb '15

06 Feb '15

Hi packagers, is somewhere a page where people can raise awareness of new releases that are not yet packaged? For example there is a new Doxygen and ParaView version. Probably those capable building the packages are not aware of the new versions. Bye Christoph -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner(a)opensuse.org

4 3