On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 10:44:39AM -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 16:50 -0700, Robert Read wrote: > > > > What configure options did you use when you built lustre? I think "-- > > with-ldiskfsprogs" will configure lustre to use these names, however > > the standard version the e2fs utils doesn't use this naming scheme. > > If the --with-ldiskfsprogs was indeed used, perhaps/probably, configure > should check that ldiskfsprogs was installed on the build system. > Additionally, the Requires: tags in the resulting RPM should probably be > changed to ldiskfsprogs from e2fsprogs, if that is not already being > done. > > Perhaps Josephine could file a bug to those effects. > > Given that having the ldiskfsprogs flavour of the utilities installed is > strictly a run-time requirement, perhaps the above configure enhancement > not be so strict, but certainly the latter, the RPM requirement, should > be. If Josephine had installed resulting RPMs, that would have been her > signal that things were not quite aligning. If configure is not so > strict, it could at least warn about the missing utilities.
I agree that the spec file must have a Requires: ldiskfsprogs (ours does). Adding a build-time requirement (and presumably BuildRequires:) just adds unnecessary work at build time for modern build systems such as mock. Please don't do that. Jim p.s. See bug 17963 for background on --with-ldiskfsprogs. _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
