|
|
|
|
  samba&ldap - tacy_lee [ 2003-06-03 19:38 | 484 byte(s)]
Re: samba&ldap - tacy_lee [ 2003-06-03 20:37 | 5,578 byte(s)]
|
|
|
|
[Original]
[Print]
[Top]
|
samba&ldap
在rh9下面编译samba-2.2.8a，设置了--with-ldapsam，有如下错误出现：
1： checking for unpackaged file(s):/usr/lib/rpm/check-
files /var/tem/samba
2： error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
3： /usr/bin/pdbedit
4： RPM build errors:
5： Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found：
6： /usr/bin/pdbedit
多谢！
|
|
|
----
我要多把些時間浪費在這上面...)
好好學習天天睡覺
|
|
[Original]
[Print]
[Top]
|
|
[Original]
[Print]
[Top]
|
Unpackaged files message in RPM-4.1 and following
RPM version 4.1 and following demonstrate a new behaviour in the rpmbuild process. Previously, a build process might place any number of files, say in the %install stanza, when running the make install part of a Makefile, in the customary /var/tmp/%{name}-root/ BuildRoot (the RPM_BUILD_ROOT). Once through that part of the Makefile, it can then completely ignore these files in the %files binary packaging stanza.
This often happens when an upstream maintainer adds, or deletes items from new directory spurs in the make install , and the change might be missed during an unattended or automated rebuild. This option permits careful packagers to cross check the quality of their packaging.
So as a cross check, /usr/lib/rpm/check-files is now enabled during the %files stanza, to help a packager identify possibly omitted files. This obviously will disclose breakage in existing .SPEC files, but this should be a reasonably plainless transition as the specfile packager amends them to properly account for all expected files.
Obviously some maintaining packagers will take some time to complete the process for their packages; in the interim, for the causal package builder, Jeff Johnson offered this advice.
-- R P Herrold, <herrold@owlriver.com>, Editor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 18:42:44 -0400
From: Jeff Johnson <jbj@redhat.com>
Reply-To: rpm-list@redhat.com
To: rpm-list@redhat.com
Subject: rh-rpm] Re: Advised wanted on building perl module rpms
On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 11:34:29PM +0100, Mark C wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm building a perl-SDL rpm, I have successfully got it to compile and
> build as per my spec file (now I have a headache :-) as it kept wanting
> to install itself into the proper destination directory).
>
> Anyway when the build finished, it spate out a warning regarding files
> found, but not packaged, the error below:
>
> Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
> /var/tmp/rpmbuild/perl-SDL-root
> warning: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
> /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/perllocal.pod
>
A pod file? That possibly should be included in the rpm, but I know as little as possible about perl :-)
Meanwhile, this is new behavior in rpm-4.1, detecting built but unpackaged files. The default behavior (if you don't have redhat-rpm-config installed), is to stop the build.
The "fix" is to either
1) include the file in a package (or equivalently do
rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/path/to/file
in %install).
2) Reconfigure to warn, not stop, the build. The relevant macro(s) are (from /usr/lib/rpm/macros):
#
# Script gets packaged file list on input and buildroot as first parameter.
# Returns list of unpackaged files, i.e. files in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT not packaged.
#
# Note: Disable (by commenting out) for legacy compatibility.
%__check_files /usr/lib/rpm/check-files %{buildroot}
#
# Should unpackaged files in a build root terminate a build?
#
# Note: The default value should be 0 for legacy compatibility.
%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 1
#
# Should missing %doc files in the build directory terminate a build?
#
# Note: The default value should be 0 for legacy compatibility.
%_missing_doc_files_terminate_build 1
Put alternative values in /etc/rpm/macros (or ~/.rpmmacros) to taste.
HTH
73 de Jeff
--
Jeff Johnson ARS N3NPQ
jbj@redhat.com (jbj@jbj.org)
Chapel Hill, NC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 14:14:49 -0200
From: Andre Costa <brblueser@uol.com.br>
Reply-To: rpm-list@redhat.com
To: rpm-list@redhat.com
Subject: Re: RH 8.0 httpd-2.0.40-8.src.rpm has build problems
Hi,
I might be able to help with this one, since I was the original poster of a similar question: Jeff Johnson taught me this nice trick:
echo "%_unpackaged_files_terminate_build 0" >> /etc/rpm/macros
This will instruct RPM 4.1 not to abort due to unpackaged files.
Last updated: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 14:32:00 -0400
|
|
|
----
我要多把些時間浪費在這上面...)
好好學習天天睡覺
|
|
[Original]
[Print]
[Top]
|
|
|
声明: 本页内容为中国Linux论坛的内容镜像，文章的版权以及其他所有的相关权利属于中国Linux论坛和相应文章的作者，如果转载，请注明文章来源及相关版权信息。