Hi,
I am trying to build the coreutils binary RPM from the CentOS 5.0 source RPM using:
sudo rpmbuild --rebuild coreutils-5.97-12.1.el5.src.rpm
However, it is erroring out with the following:
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /var/tmp/coreutils-root error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/locale/af/LC_TIME/coreutils.mo ... /usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_TIME/coreutils.mo
These are symbolic links to ../LC_MESSAGES/coreutils.mo which are not picked up by the %find_lang macro in the spec because the /usr/lib/rpm/find-lang.shscript uses '-type f' on its find.
Any idea what may be wrong?
By the way, here are the versions of some of the related rpms: rpm-4.4.2-37.el5 glibc-2.5-12 findutils-4.2.27-4.1
Thanks for any help, Rob
Jeff Johnson kindly answered my question off-line. It seems that I needed to install the redhat-rpm-config RPM, which overrides find-lang.sh.
Thanks, Rob
On 6/20/07, Rob West robertfwest@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to build the coreutils binary RPM from the CentOS 5.0 source RPM using:
sudo rpmbuild --rebuild coreutils-5.97-12.1.el5.src.rpm
However, it is erroring out with the following:
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /var/tmp/coreutils-root error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/locale/af/LC_TIME/coreutils.mo ... /usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_TIME/coreutils.mo
These are symbolic links to ../LC_MESSAGES/coreutils.mo which are not picked up by the %find_lang macro in the spec because the /usr/lib/rpm/find- lang.sh script uses '-type f' on its find.
Any idea what may be wrong?
By the way, here are the versions of some of the related rpms: rpm-4.4.2-37.el5 glibc-2.5-12 findutils-4.2.27-4.1
Thanks for any help, Rob
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 11:46 -0400, Rob West wrote:
Jeff Johnson kindly answered my question off-line. It seems that I needed to install the redhat-rpm-config RPM, which overrides find-lang.sh.
...
On 6/20/07, Rob West robertfwest@gmail.com wrote: Hi,
I am trying to build the coreutils binary RPM from the CentOS 5.0 source RPM using: sudo rpmbuild --rebuild coreutils-5.97-12.1.el5.src.rpm
You should consider building RPMs as a normal user. Building as root is dangerous. See:
http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/YumAndRPM "Get set up for rebuilding packages while not being root"
Phil
On 6/20/07, Philip R. Schaffner Philip.R.Schaffner@nasa.gov wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 11:46 -0400, Rob West wrote:
Jeff Johnson kindly answered my question off-line. It seems that I needed to install the redhat-rpm-config RPM, which overrides find-lang.sh.
...
On 6/20/07, Rob West robertfwest@gmail.com wrote: Hi,
I am trying to build the coreutils binary RPM from the CentOS 5.0 source RPM using: sudo rpmbuild --rebuild coreutils-5.97-12.1.el5.src.rpm
You should consider building RPMs as a normal user. Building as root is dangerous. See:
http://wiki.centos.org/TipsAndTricks/YumAndRPM "Get set up for rebuilding packages while not being root"
He knows this....james
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007, Rob West wrote:
Jeff Johnson kindly answered my question off-line. It seems that I needed to install the redhat-rpm-config RPM, which overrides find-lang.sh.
If that is required in order to build, then shouldn't it be listed via a BuildRequires?
Thanks, Rob
On 6/20/07, Rob West robertfwest@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am trying to build the coreutils binary RPM from the CentOS 5.0 source RPM using:
sudo rpmbuild --rebuild coreutils-5.97-12.1.el5.src.rpm
However, it is erroring out with the following:
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files /var/tmp/coreutils-root error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/locale/af/LC_TIME/coreutils.mo ... /usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_TIME/coreutils.mo
These are symbolic links to ../LC_MESSAGES/coreutils.mo which are not picked up by the %find_lang macro in the spec because the /usr/lib/rpm/find- lang.sh script uses '-type f' on its find.
Any idea what may be wrong?
By the way, here are the versions of some of the related rpms: rpm-4.4.2-37.el5 glibc-2.5-12 findutils-4.2.27-4.1
Thanks for any help, Rob
Charlie Brady wrote:
If that is required in order to build, then shouldn't it be listed via a BuildRequires?
Not according to the Fedora guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/FullExceptionList
Greg
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.2/858 - Release Date: 6/21/2007 1:46 PM
On 6/21/07, Greg Swallow greg@runlevel7.ca wrote:
Charlie Brady wrote:
If that is required in order to build, then shouldn't it be listed via a BuildRequires?
Not according to the Fedora guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/FullExceptionList
Greg
The real issue here is that somewhere in the distant past someone decided to provide a vendor specific find-lang.sh that allows for symbolic links rather than fixing rpm's find-lang.sh to do this. Maybe they meant to roll it into rpm at some point, but they didn't.
Also, the exception list is not a very controlled way to run things. The idea of build requirements is that you should be able to drive a build soup to nuts through them. Having an exception list doesn't marry to that very well....that said its good to know it was documented.
Thanks...james