https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1760617
--- Comment #26 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Qianqian Fang from comment #23)
thanks for the review.
the updated spec file can be found at
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/fangq/fedorapkg/mmclab/mmc.spec
but it does not build any more. the issue is related to how to
"%octpkglibdir". I would like to know how to fix this.
> Please check this---fedora review failed to install the packages.
I managed to reproduce this issue using mock, see the mock log attached at
the bottom.
basically, the issue is that mmc/octave-mmclab has a dependency to
octave-iso2mesh, but it complains libmpfr.so.4 could not be installed. I
found that this .so file is part of mpfr package.
I already listed mpfr-devel in octave-iso2mesh's spec file, and from the
mpfr's spec, it the devel package depends on the main package, so assuming
that both mpfr and mpfr-devel should have been installed for
octave-iso2mesh. but somehow, they were not.
can you let me know if this is a problem for iso2mesh? or I did not use mock
properly?
I'm not seeing the dep error anymore. So I'm not sure what was happening here.
I don't think iso2mesh should Require: mpfr-devel, but we can discuss that in a
different bug (or on the ML).
> > octave-mmc has a mex file, so it should not be noarch,
should it. Please
> check. The files should go to %octpkglibdir instead of %octpkgdir too.
I did not specify BuildArch for octave-mmclab. From the generated rpms, it
seems is not noarch. the only two noarch packages are mmc-demos and
mmclab-demos, can you verify if this is the case?
I tried to follow the arch-specific octave template
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
Octave#Arch_specific_Octave_spec_template
and made the follow change, but rpmbuild failed, complaining that directory
not found. is this the right way to add %{octpkglibdir}? I also removed %dir
as the template showed, then it complains both file missing and dir missing.
I've opened a PR with a tweak that just puts the mex file in the right place.
The octave macros don't seem to do it---but I will email the ML to confirm.
If you can have a look at it and submit the updated spec/srpm links, I'll
re-run fedora-review on everything. I think we're quite close to completion
here. :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component