[lug] source rpm dependencies

[Nate Duehr]

This is where I love dpkg.  "bash - provides sh".
Go Debian!  :-) hahaha...

Quoting "D. Stimits" <stimits at idcomm.com>:

> Still no luck. The recompile stage works, but does not produce an rpm.
> During that stage, it makes the same inaccurate statements about missing
> dependencies. Then the -bb --nodeps does this when run:
> rpm -bb --nodeps automake-1.4d-1.src.rpm
> File /..../automake-1.4d-1.src.rpm does not appear to be a specfile.
> 
> There *is* though a /usr/src/redhat/SPECS/automake.spec that is present,
> but this is in a different directory. So I cd there, and try via naming
> that spec file to the rpm -bb --nodeps, and it looks at first like it
> works, but then it ends with the same bogus prerequisite failure of
> "sh". No rpm produced. rpm *really* needs a better means of forcing
> rebuilds. I guess I am going to have to rip out my automake by rpm and
> use a tarball, but I am worried that something related, maybe aclocal,
> is going to be broken by this.
> 
> D. Stimits, stimits at idcomm.com
> 
> John Hernandez wrote:
> > 
> > Can you get around this by doing it in two steps?
> > 
> > rpm --recompile --nodeps
> > 
> > rpm -bb --nodeps
> > 
> > "D. Stimits" wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm having problems on occasion with source rpm rebuilds. What
> happens
> > > is that for one reason or another, rpm mistakenly believes some
> other
> > > dependency is not met (it is usually wrong, most recently thinking I
> > > didn't have "sh", but I have "bash"). Now I can add a --nodeps, but
> > > apparently depencies are checked twice; once for the rebuild itself,
> and
> > > then again for the completed binary rpm. So when it gets to the part
> > > where it is supposed to build the binary rpm, it no longer knows it
> was
> > > given --nodeps, and refuses to build it. I *really* want to tell it
> to
> > > build that binary rpm no matter what it thinks it will depend on.
> > > Although it is going on to my system, I can see that it would be
> useful
> > > to create rpm's for other people on other systems, and it just
> irritates
> > > me that I *must* not build a binary that has missing dependencies on
> my
> > > local system. Does anyone here know a way to make it at least
> attempt to
> > > build the binary rpm even if the resulting binary would lack
> > > dependencies on the local machine? At the risk of repeating myself,
> > > --nodeps will not do the job, it gets lost before the binary compile
> is
> > > attempted. I see this as a logic bug in the rpm tool.
> > >
> > > D. Stimits, stimits at idcomm.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> > > Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> > Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> 



--
Nate Duehr, nate at natetech.com

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROM's."