Another issue: GNU find ordering. Max/min depth arguments need to be before
type/name
===
+ find
/home/bareos/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/bareos-21.1.3-1_mssl.x86_64//usr/lib64/bareos
-type l -name 'libbareos*.so' -maxdepth 1 -exec rm '{}' ';'
find: warning: you have specified the -maxdepth option after a non-option
argument -type, but options are not positional (-maxdepth affects tests
specified before it as well as those specified after it). Please specify
options before other arguments
===
bareos.spec diff
1095c1095
< find %{buildroot}/%{library_dir} -type l -name "libbareos*.so" -maxdepth
1 -exec rm {} \;
---
> find %{buildroot}/%{library_dir} -maxdepth 1 -type l -name
"libbareos*.so" -exec rm {} \;
On Tuesday, 28 June 2022 at 10:00:55 UTC+1 Alan Brown wrote:
> Extra EL8 requires "so far"
>
> ====
> EPEL!
>
> gtest-devel
> mariadb-devel.x86_64
> json-c-devel
> libxml2-devel
> nfs4-acl-tools (unsure on this one)
> gdb
> mtx
> mt-st
> s3cmd
> php
> pamtester
> pam_script
> python3-selenium.noarch
> chromedriver
> binutils-devel
> libgit2-devel
> libbsd-devel
>
> (vixdisklib requires vmware, which isn't part of the RH/EPEL set)
>
> ====
>
> in order to use the postgresql.org repos (PGDG) instead of RH ones
>
> for whichever PG version you have installed:
>
> alternatives --install /usr/pgsql pgsql /usr/pgsql-14/ 20
> alternatives --install /usr/include/pgsql pgsql-include /usr/pgsql/include
> 20
>
> (This can probably be dealt with via scripting)
> ====
>
> NB: gtest is NOT being detected correctly. I'm still trying to figure out
> why, as it is OK using the buildtest scripts
>
> ====
> spec diff
>
> 91c91
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} > 0 && 0%{?rhel_version} < 500
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} > 0 && 0%{?rhel} < 5
> 100c100
> < %if 0%{?centos_version} == 505 || 0%{?rhel_version} == 505
> ---
> > %if 0%{?centos_version} == 505 || 0%{?rhel} == 5
> 111c111
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} >= 700 || 0%{?centos_version} >= 700
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 || 0%{?centos_version} >= 700
> 117c117
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} >= 700 && !0%{?centos_version}
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 && !0%{?centos_version}
> 126c126
> < %if 0%{?centos_version} == 700 || 0%{?rhel_version} == 700
> ---
> > %if 0%{?centos_version} == 700 || 0%{?rhel} == 7
> 209c209
> < %if 0%{?centos_version} > 700 || 0%{?rhel_version} > 700 || 0%{?fedora}
> >= 29
> ---
> > %if 0%{?centos_version} > 700 || 0%{?rhel} > 7 || 0%{?fedora} >= 29
> 220c220
> < %if 0%{?centos_version} >= 800 || 0%{?rhel_version} >= 800 ||
> 0%{?fedora} >= 31
> ---
> > %if 0%{?centos_version} >= 800 || 0%{?rhel} >= 8 || 0%{?fedora} >= 31
> 255c255
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} || 0%{?centos_version} || 0%{?fedora_version}
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} || 0%{?centos_version} || 0%{?fedora_version}
> 260c260
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} && 0%{?rhel_version} <= 600
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 6
> 272c272
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} >= 600 || 0%{?centos_version} >= 600 ||
> 0%{?fedora_version} >= 14
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 6 || 0%{?centos_version} >= 600 || 0%{?fedora_version}
> >= 14
> 287c287
> < %if 0%{?rhel_version} >= 700 || 0%{?centos_version} >= 700 ||
> 0%{?fedora_version} >= 16 || 0%{?suse_version} >= 1110
> ---
> > %if 0%{?rhel} >= 7 || 0%{?centos_version} >= 700 || 0%{?fedora_version}
> >= 16 || 0%{?suse_version} >= 1110
> 913c913
> < %if 0%{?centos_version} == 700 || 0%{?rhel_version} == 700
> ---
> > %if 0%{?centos_version} == 700 || 0%{?rhel} == 7
>
> On Monday, 27 June 2022 at 20:00:29 UTC+1 Alan Brown wrote:
>
>> Things aren't as smooth as I was hoping by dropping back to an EL8 system
>> and building on that
>>
>> In short, the build scripts are not correctly detecting they're running
>> on RHEL and then attempt to set bogus requires, plus miss important things
>> (like redhat-lsb)
>>
>> This is occurring because {?rhel_version} isn't valid in rpmbuild unless
>> you're generating it dynamically - and the specfile does not do that
>>
>> There's some discussion about this on stackoverflow but the short version
>> is that you can't (and shouldn't) build for specific RHEL minor versions -
>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55131772/how-to-check-for-redhat-rhel-minor-version-in-rpm-spec-file
>>
>> Centos is so closely tied into RHEL these days that I doubt the
>> centos_version macro is working correctly either
>>
>> Should I post the diff here or pastebin?
>>
>> On Monday, 27 June 2022 at 14:49:39 UTC+1 Alan Brown wrote:
>>
>>> using the system-tests script as a template on 21.1.3, the following
>>> change is all that's needed
>>>
>>> - cmake -Dpostgresql=yes -Dsystemtest_db_user=$USER -Dtraymonitor=yes
>>> ../bareos
>>> +make -Dpostgresql=yes -Dsystemtest_db_user=$USER -Dtraymonitor=yes
>>> -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS="-Wno-error=deprecated-declarations" ../bareos
>>>
>>> Make test then works with the following error
>>>
>>> The following tests FAILED:
>>> 286 - system:py3plug-fd-local-fileset (Failed)
>>>
>>> Which is the same as I get for systemtests on pre-22.x testing
>>>
>>> Webui tests are not building due to missing chromelib
>>>
>>> I'll dig a little more and work out what changes are needed for the SPEC
>>> file
>>>
>>> On Monday, 27 June 2022 at 10:34:40 UTC+1 Alan Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>> As a fyi: 21.1.3 tarball doesn't build on Rhel9/clang using the
>>>> existing SPEC files and instructions
>>>>
>>>> The most obvious issue is that clang treats all warnings as errors and
>>>> the MD5 code is deprecated, however it still falls over after this is
>>>> overridden
>>>>
>>>> The build-test script building from the current git (merge 1180) mostly
>>>> succeeds
>>>>
>>>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"bareos-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to bareos-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bareos-devel/5db27725-3a5a-4e57-b0f2-32835ab54c3en%40googlegroups.com.
