[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #42 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Honggang LI from comment #41)

> It is more complex than that.
> 
> 1) Individual packages do not exist any more. They are RDMA hardware
> usr-space drivers which has been folded into new "libibverbs" packages.
> These packages should be retired.
> 
> rpms/libusnic_verbs -- No-op libibverbs driver for the Cisco usNIC
> device ( master f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/libcxgb3 -- Chelsio T3 iWARP HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25
> f24 )
> rpms/libcxgb4 -- Chelsio T4 iWARP HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25
> f24 )
> rpms/libmlx5 -- Mellanox Connect-IB and ConnectX-4 InfiniBand HCAs User
> Space Driver ( master f26 f25 )
> rpms/libocrdma -- User-space Library for Emulex ROCE Device ( master f26
> f25 f24 )

Except libmlx5 and libocrdma, I retired the "f27" and "master" git branches for
rest of 15 packages. I will contact package owner of libmlx5 and libocrdma to
retire them.

> rpms/libipathverbs -- QLogic InfiniPath HCA Userspace Driver ( master
> f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/libmlx4 -- Mellanox ConnectX InfiniBand HCA Userspace Driver (
> master f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/libmthca -- Mellanox InfiniBand HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26
> f25 f24 )
> rpms/libnes -- NetEffect RNIC Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25 f24 )
> 
> 
> 2) Packages still exist with the *old* names.
> 
> rpms/libibcm -- Userspace InfiniBand Connection Manager ( master f26 f25
> f24 )
> rpms/libibumad -- OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD)
> library ( master f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/libibverbs -- A library for direct userspace use of RDMA
> (InfiniBand/iWARP) hardware ( master f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/librdmacm -- Userspace RDMA Connection Manager ( master f26 f25 f24
> )
> rpms/ibacm -- InfiniBand Communication Manager Assistant ( master f26
> f25 f24 )
> 
> 
> 3) Packages had been renamed.
> rpms/libiwpm -- iWarp Port Mapper userspace daemon ( master f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/rdma -- RDMA Kernel Stack Initializer ( master f26 f25 f24 )
> rpms/srptools -- Tools for using the InfiniBand SRP protocol devices (
> master f26 f25 f24 )

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Hanns-Joachim Uhl  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bugpr...@us.ibm.com,
   ||d...@danny.cz
External Bug ID||IBM Linux Technology Center
   ||157646



-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #41 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #40)
> Shouldn't the independent libibverbs [1] and librdmacm [2] packages be
> retired now?
> 
> 
> [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libibverbs
> [2] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/librdmacm


It is more complex than that.

1) Individual packages do not exist any more. They are RDMA hardware usr-space
drivers which has been folded into new "libibverbs" packages. These packages
should be retired.

rpms/libusnic_verbs -- No-op libibverbs driver for the Cisco usNIC device (
master f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/libcxgb3 -- Chelsio T3 iWARP HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25 f24
)
rpms/libcxgb4 -- Chelsio T4 iWARP HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25 f24
)
rpms/libmlx5 -- Mellanox Connect-IB and ConnectX-4 InfiniBand HCAs User
Space Driver ( master f26 f25 )
rpms/libocrdma -- User-space Library for Emulex ROCE Device ( master f26
f25 f24 )
rpms/libipathverbs -- QLogic InfiniPath HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26
f25 f24 )
rpms/libmlx4 -- Mellanox ConnectX InfiniBand HCA Userspace Driver ( master
f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/libmthca -- Mellanox InfiniBand HCA Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25
f24 )
rpms/libnes -- NetEffect RNIC Userspace Driver ( master f26 f25 f24 )


2) Packages still exist with the *old* names.

rpms/libibcm -- Userspace InfiniBand Connection Manager ( master f26 f25
f24 )
rpms/libibumad -- OpenFabrics Alliance InfiniBand umad (user MAD) library (
master f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/libibverbs -- A library for direct userspace use of RDMA
(InfiniBand/iWARP) hardware ( master f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/librdmacm -- Userspace RDMA Connection Manager ( master f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/ibacm -- InfiniBand Communication Manager Assistant ( master f26 f25
f24 )


3) Packages had been renamed.
rpms/libiwpm -- iWarp Port Mapper userspace daemon ( master f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/rdma -- RDMA Kernel Stack Initializer ( master f26 f25 f24 )
rpms/srptools -- Tools for using the InfiniBand SRP protocol devices (
master f26 f25 f24 )

libiwpm --> iwpmd
rdma ---> rdma-core
srptools --> srp_daemon

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||vondr...@redhat.com



--- Comment #40 from Vít Ondruch  ---
Shouldn't the independent libibverbs [1] and librdmacm [2] packages be retired
now?


[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libibverbs
[2] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/librdmacm

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-08-14 03:45:26



--- Comment #39 from Honggang LI  ---
Confirmed all sub-packages of rdma-core packages are available in rawhide repo.
Closing this bug as 'RAWHIDE'.

Thanks!

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Kevin Fenzi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(ke...@scrye.com)  |



--- Comment #38 from Kevin Fenzi  ---
We needed to have a successfull rawhide compose (which has been failing for one
reason after another). Happily we did get one late yesterday/this morning, so
it should be there in rawhide now.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(ke...@scrye.com)



--- Comment #37 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Kevin Fenzi from comment #33)
> So, the problem is actually that the old libibverbs package had no
> dependency on perl, but this new one (subpackage of rdma-core) does. This
> results in the rawhide composes failing because lorax prunes out perl and
> then the /usr/bin/rxe_cfg script has no perl and errors out. 
> 
> So, very short term I have just untagged rdma-core again, so we can
> hopefully get a rawhide compose today or this weekend. 

Hi, Kevin
 Fedora-rawhide lorax addressed the perl package issue, and we had rebuilt
rdma-core with all known issues got fixed. I checked my fedora-rawhide virtual
machine, only old rdma package available.

 What we need to do to replace the old rdma package with the new rdma-core
package?


> Slightly longer term, we have put in a PR to make lorax not prune perl: 
> https://github.com/rhinstaller/lorax/pull/228 once thats merged and in a
> rawhide lorax build we can retag or rebuild rdma-core
> 
> Longer term still, it would sure be nice if we didn't have to have perl on
> minimal images. I don't know how important rxe_cfg is or if it could be
> re-written to work with system-python or as a binary, but that would sure be
> nice 
> to drop the dep on perl 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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #36 from Honggang LI  ---
Created attachment 1310973
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1310973=edit
Use %{?systemd_requires} macro

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #35 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Kevin Fenzi from comment #33)

> Slightly longer term, we have put in a PR to make lorax not prune perl: 
> https://github.com/rhinstaller/lorax/pull/228 once thats merged and in a
> rawhide lorax build we can retag or rebuild rdma-core

I checked
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/lorax/27.5/1.fc27/src/lorax-27.5-1.fc27.src.rpm
, the patch had been merged.

Joard, we need rebuild rdma-core again to get the new rdma-core package into
Fedora Rawhide. I had installed a fresh Rawhide (f27) virtual machine, f27
still using the old rdma package.

Please consider to apply this patch, it fixes to minor issue.
1) As #comment 31 suggest, it use %{?systemd_requires} macro
2) srp_daemon should own directory %{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon

srp_daemon only owns %{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon/start_on_all_ports . It should
own the whole directory %{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon . Issue 2) exists in upstream
rdma-core git repo too.

diff --git a/rdma-core.spec b/rdma-core.spec
index 540889b..ce244f3 100644
--- a/rdma-core.spec
+++ b/rdma-core.spec
@@ -175,9 +175,7 @@ displays information about RDMA devices.

 %package -n ibacm
 Summary: InfiniBand Communication Manager Assistant
-Requires(post): systemd-units
-Requires(preun): systemd-units
-Requires(postun): systemd-units
+%{?systemd_requires}
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibumad%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibverbs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
@@ -194,9 +192,7 @@ library knows how to talk directly to the ibacm daemon to
retrieve data.

 %package -n iwpmd
 Summary: iWarp Port Mapper userspace daemon
-Requires(post): systemd-units
-Requires(preun): systemd-units
-Requires(postun): systemd-units
+%{?systemd_requires}
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

 %description -n iwpmd
@@ -242,9 +238,7 @@ Summary: Tools for using the InfiniBand SRP protocol
devices
 Obsoletes: srptools <= 1.0.3
 Provides: srptools = %{version}-%{release}
 Obsoletes: openib-srptools <= 0.0.6
-Requires(post): systemd-units
-Requires(preun): systemd-units
-Requires(postun): systemd-units
+%{?systemd_requires}
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibumad%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: libibverbs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
@@ -489,7 +483,7 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/

 %files -n srp_daemon
 %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/srp_daemon.conf
-%{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon/start_on_all_ports
+%{_libexecdir}/srp_daemon
 %{_unitdir}/srp_daemon.service
 %{_unitdir}/srp_daemon_port@.service
 %{_sbindir}/ibsrpdm

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #34 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #30)
> And now the build fails on ppc64le, while successful on all other arches:
> 
> bin/ib_acme: error while loading shared libraries:
> /builddir/build/BUILD/rdma-core-14/lib/libibverbs.so.1: expected
> localentry:0 `pthread_cond_init'
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.X6YP93 (%install)
> RPM build errors:
> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.X6YP93 (%install)
> 
> For the time being, I've thrown a quick hack into the package to make it at
> least build, and we can debug from there, with the caveat that the ppc64le
> package is at least partially broken at runtime.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474973#c3

Jarod, please revert this hack as issue had been fixed. Thanks

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Kevin Fenzi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ke...@scrye.com



--- Comment #33 from Kevin Fenzi  ---
So, the problem is actually that the old libibverbs package had no dependency
on perl, but this new one (subpackage of rdma-core) does. This results in the
rawhide composes failing because lorax prunes out perl and then the
/usr/bin/rxe_cfg script has no perl and errors out. 

So, very short term I have just untagged rdma-core again, so we can hopefully
get a rawhide compose today or this weekend. 

Slightly longer term, we have put in a PR to make lorax not prune perl: 
https://github.com/rhinstaller/lorax/pull/228 once thats merged and in a
rawhide lorax build we can retag or rebuild rdma-core

Longer term still, it would sure be nice if we didn't have to have perl on
minimal images. I don't know how important rxe_cfg is or if it could be
re-written to work with system-python or as a binary, but that would sure be
nice 
to drop the dep on perl 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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #32 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Dennis Gilmore from comment #25)
> this package is broken and untagged, scripts in /usr/bin that use perl for
> instance, with missing Requires on perl. rdma-core-12-0.1.rc3.1.fc26 broke
> the compose process with 
> 2017-01-29 07:38:48,191: /usr/bin/perl, needed by
> /var/tmp/lorax.vbio_v1v/installtree/usr/bin/rxe_cfg, does not exist
> /usr/bin/perl, needed by
> /var/tmp/lorax.vbio_v1v/installtree/usr/bin/rxe_cfg, does not exist

Hi, Dennis
 Could you please provide the reproducer for this issue? thanks

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #31 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #29)
> That makes the build fail:
> error: line 178: Unknown tag: %systemd_requires

It should be "%{?systemd_requires}", see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets?rd=Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Scriptlets

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #30 from Jarod Wilson  ---
And now the build fails on ppc64le, while successful on all other arches:

bin/ib_acme: error while loading shared libraries:
/builddir/build/BUILD/rdma-core-14/lib/libibverbs.so.1: expected localentry:0
`pthread_cond_init'
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.X6YP93 (%install)
RPM build errors:
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.X6YP93 (%install)

For the time being, I've thrown a quick hack into the package to make it at
least build, and we can debug from there, with the caveat that the ppc64le
package is at least partially broken at runtime.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #29 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #27)
> systemd-units is long gone. You should replace:
> Requires(post): systemd-units
> Requires(preun): systemd-units
> Requires(postun): systemd-units
> →
> %systemd_requires

That makes the build fail:
error: line 178: Unknown tag: %systemd_requires

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #28 from Jarod Wilson  ---
Pushed an rdma-core v14 build just now.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||zbys...@in.waw.pl



--- Comment #27 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek  ---
systemd-units is long gone. You should replace:
Requires(post): systemd-units
Requires(preun): systemd-units
Requires(postun): systemd-units
→
%systemd_requires

Those Requires are generated automatically (when %post -p /sbin/ldconfig is
used). Can be removed:
Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig
Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig

It's better to not add files in /etc:
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/udev/rules.d/*
→ %_udevrulesdir

%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/modprobe.d/mlx4.conf
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/modprobe.d/truescale.conf
Are those really needed? If yes, then they should be in /usr/lib/modprobe.d.

See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs.
%doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/libibverbs.md
%doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/rxe.md
should all have no %version suffix.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #26 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Dennis Gilmore from comment #25)
> this package is broken and untagged, scripts in /usr/bin that use perl for
> instance, with missing Requires on perl.

Say what now?

$ rpm -qp --requires ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libibverbs-12-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
/usr/bin/perl
config(libibverbs) = 12-1.fc26
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.15)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.8)(64bit)
libdl.so.2()(64bit)
libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libibverbs.so.1()(64bit)
libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.0)(64bit)
libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.1)(64bit)
libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.3)(64bit)
libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.4)(64bit)
libnl-3.so.200()(64bit)
libnl-3.so.200(libnl_3)(64bit)
libnl-route-3.so.200()(64bit)
libnl-route-3.so.200(libnl_3)(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2)(64bit)
perl(File::Basename)
perl(Getopt::Long)
perl(strict)
perl(warnings)
rdma-core(x86-64) = 12-1.fc26
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1


> you need to properly deal with the existing packages also

Obsoletes and Provides are all there, so far as I know. I'm a bit confused as
to what is actually incorrect.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #25 from Dennis Gilmore  ---
this package is broken and untagged, scripts in /usr/bin that use perl for
instance, with missing Requires on perl. rdma-core-12-0.1.rc3.1.fc26 broke the
compose process with 
2017-01-29 07:38:48,191: /usr/bin/perl, needed by
/var/tmp/lorax.vbio_v1v/installtree/usr/bin/rxe_cfg, does not exist
/usr/bin/perl, needed by /var/tmp/lorax.vbio_v1v/installtree/usr/bin/rxe_cfg,
does not exist

packages in anaconda runtime changed

diff -u  new old
--- new2017-01-30 07:53:34.145977214 -0600
+++ old2017-01-30 07:53:26.247983109 -0600
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
 anaconda-widgets.x86_64
 anaconda.x86_64
 atk.x86_64
+atmel-firmware.noarch
 at-spi2-atk.x86_64
 at-spi2-core.x86_64
 attr.x86_64
@@ -26,6 +27,7 @@
 basesystem.noarch
 bash.x86_64
 bcache-tools.x86_64
+bfa-firmware.noarch
 bind99-libs.x86_64
 bind99-license.noarch
 bind-libs-lite.x86_64
@@ -199,14 +201,25 @@
 iptables-libs.x86_64
 iptables.x86_64
 iputils.x86_64
+ipw2100-firmware.noarch
 ipw2200-firmware.noarch
 iscsi-initiator-utils-iscsiuio.x86_64
 iscsi-initiator-utils.x86_64
 iso-codes.noarch
 isomd5sum.x86_64
 iwl1000-firmware.noarch
+iwl135-firmware.noarch
+iwl2000-firmware.noarch
+iwl2030-firmware.noarch
+iwl3160-firmware.noarch
+iwl3945-firmware.noarch
+iwl5000-firmware.noarch
+iwl5150-firmware.noarch
+iwl6000-firmware.noarch
 iwl6000g2a-firmware.noarch
 iwl6000g2b-firmware.noarch
+iwl6050-firmware.noarch
+iwl7260-firmware.noarch
 jansson.x86_64
 jasper-libs.x86_64
 jbigkit-libs.x86_64
@@ -287,8 +300,8 @@
 libdrm.x86_64
 libedit.x86_64
 libepoxy.x86_64
+libertas-sd8686-firmware.noarch
 libertas-usb8388-firmware.noarch
-libertas-usb8388-olpc-firmware.noarch
 libestr.x86_64
 libevdev.x86_64
 libevent.x86_64
@@ -322,6 +335,7 @@
 liblogging-stdlog.x86_64
 libmcpp.x86_64
 libmetalink.x86_64
+libmlx4.x86_64
 libmnl.x86_64
 libmodman.x86_64
 libmount.x86_64
@@ -523,23 +537,6 @@
 pciutils.x86_64
 pcmciautils.x86_64
 pcre.x86_64
-perl-Carp.noarch
-perl-constant.noarch
-perl-Errno.x86_64
-perl-Exporter.noarch
-perl-File-Path.noarch
-perl-IO.x86_64
-perl-libs.x86_64
-perl-macros.x86_64
-perl-parent.noarch
-perl-PathTools.x86_64
-perl-Scalar-List-Utils.x86_64
-perl-Socket.x86_64
-perl-Text-Tabs+Wrap.noarch
-perl-threads-shared.x86_64
-perl-threads.x86_64
-perl-Unicode-Normalize.x86_64
-perl.x86_64
 pigz.x86_64
 pixman.x86_64
 pkgconf-m4.noarch
@@ -614,7 +611,7 @@
 qrencode-libs.x86_64
 quota-nls.noarch
 quota.x86_64
-rdma-core.x86_64
+rdma.noarch
 readline.x86_64
 realmd.x86_64
 reiserfs-utils.x86_64


you need to properly deal with the existing packages also

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #24 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #23)
> Package request has been approved:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/rdma-core

Whoops, I just filed a new package request to get it into pkgdb moments before
noticing it had already been done.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #23 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/rdma-core

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #22 from Honggang LI  ---
Hi, Jarod

 Please append valid change-log to the end of SPEC file. Except that, the SPEC
file looks good. Set "fedora‑review+" flag to ACK it.

Thanks

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2

 This is intentional, as upstream source of rdma-core can be compiled
with gcc and clang.

= MUST items =

C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: Package contains no static executables.
[ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "BSD (2 clause)", "BSD (3 clause) GPL (v2)", "Unknown or
 generated". 237 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
 licensecheck in /home/honli/jd-rdma-core/Jan-22/1404043-rdma-
 core/licensecheck.txt

 This is fine. As most code released under dual license, upstream does
not add license statement at the head of every single file.

[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/infiniband
 (libibcommon-devel), /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/05rdma(rdma),
 /usr/include/rdma(kernel-headers), /etc/rdma(rdma, ibacm)

 It is OK.

[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 71680 bytes in 8 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make 

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #21 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Honggang LI from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #19)
> 
> > On another note, the +rsyslog portion is actually the opposite direction we
> > need to go here. Have discussed that with upstream, and neither rsyslog nor
> > logrotate are deemed at all necessary, as systemd's journald handles all of
> > that. (They were removed from the upstream spec, I just forgot to remove
> > them here).
> 
> Thanks for the explanation. Please notify me when the SPEC and SRPM file get
> updated.

Just pushed updated files, please give them a look! Hopefully, they're all set
now...

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #20 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #19)

> On another note, the +rsyslog portion is actually the opposite direction we
> need to go here. Have discussed that with upstream, and neither rsyslog nor
> logrotate are deemed at all necessary, as systemd's journald handles all of
> that. (They were removed from the upstream spec, I just forgot to remove
> them here).

Thanks for the explanation. Please notify me when the SPEC and SRPM file get
updated.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #19 from Jarod Wilson  ---
That's.. Odd. I can remove the comments, but surprising that it's those that
cause the problem.

On another note, the +rsyslog portion is actually the opposite direction we
need to go here. Have discussed that with upstream, and neither rsyslog nor
logrotate are deemed at all necessary, as systemd's journald handles all of
that. (They were removed from the upstream spec, I just forgot to remove them
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #18 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #17)
> I haven't touched the ldconfig issue just yet, no clue how to address that,
> will have to get some upstream input there.

==
$ rpm -qp --scripts libibcm-12-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm
postinstall program: /sbin/ldconfig
postuninstall scriptlet (using /sbin/ldconfig):

# libibumad
==

ldconfig failed because of unnecessary comments, for example, "# libibumad" for
libibcm. Please consider apply this patch.

 f26]$ diff -Nurp rdma-core.spec.old rdma-core.spec
--- rdma-core.spec.old2017-01-19 09:02:15.0 -0500
+++ rdma-core.spec2017-01-20 00:25:04.245224686 -0500
@@ -207,6 +207,7 @@ Requires(preun): systemd-units
 Requires(postun): systemd-units
 Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires: logrotate
+Requires: rsyslog

 %description -n srp_daemon
 In conjunction with the kernel ib_srp driver, srp_daemon allows you to
@@ -286,23 +287,18 @@ install -D -m0644 redhat/srp_daemon.serv
 # Delete the package's init.d scripts
 rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/

-# libibverbs
 %post -n libibverbs -p /sbin/ldconfig
 %postun -n libibverbs -p /sbin/ldconfig

-# libibcm
 %post -n libibcm -p /sbin/ldconfig
 %postun -n libibcm -p /sbin/ldconfig

-# libibumad
 %post -n libibumad -p /sbin/ldconfig
 %postun -n libibumad -p /sbin/ldconfig

-# librdmacm
 %post -n librdmacm -p /sbin/ldconfig
 %postun -n librdmacm -p /sbin/ldconfig

-# ibacm
 %post -n ibacm
 %systemd_post ibacm.service
 %preun -n ibacm
@@ -310,7 +306,6 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/
 %postun -n ibacm
 %systemd_postun_with_restart ibacm.service

-# srp_daemon
 %post -n srp_daemon
 %systemd_post srp_daemon.service
 %preun -n srp_daemon
@@ -318,7 +313,6 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/
 %postun -n srp_daemon
 %systemd_postun_with_restart srp_daemon.service

-# iwpmd
 %post -n iwpmd
 %systemd_post iwpmd.service
 %preun -n iwpmd

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #17 from Jarod Wilson  ---
Working through some of the issues, have posted a few new iterations of patches
upstream, with a few more pending. I've disabled building libibumad on 32-bit
arm, as there's memory barrier support, but everything else seems to build just
fine across all arches in Fedora:

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17225611

I haven't touched the ldconfig issue just yet, no clue how to address that,
will have to get some upstream input there.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #16 from Honggang LI  ---
Hi, Jarod

1) systemd-udev is new sub-package of systemd for FC >= 24. It owns
"/etc/udev/rules.d" and "/usr/lib/udev/rules.d/". rdma-core package installs
three files into those directories, so rdma-core should "Requires:
systemd-udev". In fact, systemd-udev is an essential package. Fedora system
can't boot without this package. As result, ipoib rename (configured in file
/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-ipoib.rules) never works if systemd-udev was
absent.

$ rpm -qpl rdma-core-12-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm | grep udev
/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-ipoib.rules
/usr/lib/udev/rules.d/98-rdma.rules
/usr/lib/udev/rules.d/rdma-ndd.rules

You dropped "Requires: rsyslog" and kept "Requires: logrotate" for srp_daemon.
If rsyslog was absent, /etc/rsyslog.d/srp_daemon.conf can't work. So, please
apply "Requires: logrotate" too.

One symptom is bellow fedora-review error message, when those "Requires:" items
absent.

[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/rsyslog.d, /etc/udev,
 /usr/lib/udev/rules.d, /usr/lib/udev, /etc/udev/rules.d

2) ndd had been moved from infiniband-diags into rdma-core package. There is a
conflict issue between those two packages.

3) POSTRUN scripts failed had been observed when run "yum/dnf erase -y rdma".

  Erasing: libibcm-12-1.el7.x86_64 
  8/17
/sbin/ldconfig: relative path `0' used to build cache
warning: %postun(libibcm-12-1.el7.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package libibcm-12-1.el7.x86_64
  Erasing: librdmacm-utils-12-1.el7.x86_64 
  9/17
  Erasing: librdmacm-12-1.el7.x86_64   
 10/17
/sbin/ldconfig: relative path `0' used to build cache
warning: %postun(librdmacm-12-1.el7.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package librdmacm-12-1.el7.x86_64
  Erasing: opensm-libs-3.3.19-1.el7.x86_64 
 11/17
  Erasing: libibmad-1.3.12-1.el7.x86_64
 12/17
  Erasing: libibumad-12-1.el7.x86_64   
 13/17
/sbin/ldconfig: relative path `0' used to build cache
warning: %postun(libibumad-12-1.el7.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package libibumad-12-1.el7.x86_64
  Erasing: libibverbs-utils-12-1.el7.x86_64
 14/17
  Erasing: libibverbs-12-1.el7.x86_64  
 15/17
/sbin/ldconfig: relative path `0' used to build cache
warning: %postun(libibverbs-12-1.el7.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1
Non-fatal POSTUN scriptlet failure in rpm package libibverbs-12-1.el7.x86_64
  Erasing: iwpmd-12-1.el7.x86_64   
 16/17
===


4) armv7hl platform rpm building task failed.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17218607

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #15 from Jarod Wilson  ---
SRPM and spec updated, based on proposed patch and upstream review discussion.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #14 from Honggang LI  ---
Created attachment 1234802
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1234802=edit
proposed patch against the SPEC file linked in comment #6.

proposed patch against the SPEC file linked in comment #6.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #13 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #6)
> http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core.spec
> http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core-12-1.fc26.
> src.rpm

Please consider attached patch "spec.patch". And please append valid changelog
to the spec file. Then please DO build the srpm in koji system and feedback the
task link. I had run fedora-review tool against local copy of updated spec and
srpm. The test result seems acceptable now.

SIMPLE functional test had been run mlx5 HCA.No plan to run the entire RDMA
regression test suite over all RDMA hardware.
1 libibverbs-utils PASSED
2 librdmacm-utils  PASSED
3 ibacmPASSED
4 SRP  PASSED
5 rempbuild (libfabric/fabtests/openmpi) PASSED
6 iwpmdNOT-TEST

thanks

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #12 from Jarod Wilson  ---
Found the part of the packaging guidelines that says why we need BR: systemd
for Fedora and verified it myself. Holding off on an srpm update until
tomorrow, pending some additional upstream feedback (and sleep).

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #10 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Honggang LI from comment #8)
> (In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #5)
> > 
> > > honli: systemd and dracut also needed.
> > 
> > These already get pulled in.
> 
> No, you missed systemd. As a result, your new srpm can't be rebuilt.

I built it in mock just fine at one point while working on updates, and just
got a shell in the buildroot, systemd is definitely there.

> > 
> > > honli: You also delete a few necessary "Requires:" tags.
> > > honli:  Please see review-comment.txt for details.
> > 
> > From that doc:
> > 
> > > honli: Please add "Requires:" entries against rsyslog, systemd, kmod,
> > > honli: logrotate, initscripts, and dracut.
> > 
> > None of these need to be listed explicitly, so far as I know. These are all
> > things that are expected to be on the system, thus no need to call them out
> > specifically. Several of them are already requirements of the kernel.
> > 
> 
> I would suggest to list explicitly. Otherwise fedora-review tool will
> complaint.
> [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
>  Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/udev, /usr/share/doc
>  /rdma-core-12, /etc/rsyslog.d, /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts,
>  /etc/udev/rules.d, /etc/udev, /etc/logrotate.d, /usr/lib/udev/rules.d
> [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
>  Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/infiniband
>  (ibacm-devel, libibverbs-devel),
>  /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/05rdma(rdma), /usr/include/rdma(kernel-
>  headers), /etc/rdma(rdma, ibacm)

Frankly, fedora-review is wrong, if it's insisting on Requires: for things that
are absolutely going to be there, unless you somehow boot your system without a
kernel installed.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #11 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Honggang LI from comment #9)
> (In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #6)
> 
> > http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core.spec
> > http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core-12-1.fc26.
> > src.rpm
> 
> Failed to rebuild this srpm.
> 
> Processing files: rdma-core-debuginfo-12-1.fc26.x86_64
> Provides: rdma-core-debuginfo = 12-1.fc26 rdma-core-debuginfo(x86-64) =
> 12-1.fc26
> Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests)
> <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rdma-core-12-1.fc26.x86_64
> error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
>/usr/lib64/rsocket/librspreload.so.1
>/usr/lib64/rsocket/librspreload.so.1.0.0
> 
> This patch works for me.
> srpm-unpacked]$ cat spec-patch1.patch 
> --- rdma-core.spec.old2016-12-21 16:59:20.0 -0500
> +++ rdma-core.spec2016-12-21 21:41:01.750808435 -0500
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ BuildRequires: pkgconfig
>  BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-3.0)
>  BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-route-3.0)
>  BuildRequires: valgrind-devel
> +BuildRequires: systemd

Hm. Maybe this fails on current Fedora mock chroots. I'm building in
something... Older. And it works fine there. I'll take a closer look in the
morning.

>  Requires: dracut
>  # Red Hat/Fedora previously shipped redhat/ as a stand-alone
> @@ -392,6 +393,7 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/
>  %{_libdir}/librdmacm*.so.*
>  %dir %{_libdir}/rsocket
>  %{_libdir}/rsocket/*.so
> +%{_libdir}/rsocket/*.so.*
>  %doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/librdmacm.md
>  %{_mandir}/man7/rsocket.*

Crap, that was supposed to be %{_libdir}/rsocket/*.so* there. I'll fix that in
the morning as well.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #9 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #6)

> http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core.spec
> http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core-12-1.fc26.
> src.rpm

Failed to rebuild this srpm.

Processing files: rdma-core-debuginfo-12-1.fc26.x86_64
Provides: rdma-core-debuginfo = 12-1.fc26 rdma-core-debuginfo(x86-64) =
12-1.fc26
Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <=
4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rdma-core-12-1.fc26.x86_64
error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
   /usr/lib64/rsocket/librspreload.so.1
   /usr/lib64/rsocket/librspreload.so.1.0.0

This patch works for me.
srpm-unpacked]$ cat spec-patch1.patch 
--- rdma-core.spec.old2016-12-21 16:59:20.0 -0500
+++ rdma-core.spec2016-12-21 21:41:01.750808435 -0500
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ BuildRequires: pkgconfig
 BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-3.0)
 BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-route-3.0)
 BuildRequires: valgrind-devel
+BuildRequires: systemd

 Requires: dracut
 # Red Hat/Fedora previously shipped redhat/ as a stand-alone
@@ -392,6 +393,7 @@ rm -rf %{buildroot}/%{_initrddir}/
 %{_libdir}/librdmacm*.so.*
 %dir %{_libdir}/rsocket
 %{_libdir}/rsocket/*.so
+%{_libdir}/rsocket/*.so.*
 %doc %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/librdmacm.md
 %{_mandir}/man7/rsocket.*

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #8 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #5)
> 
> > honli: systemd and dracut also needed.
> 
> These already get pulled in.

No, you missed systemd. As a result, your new srpm can't be rebuilt.

> 
> > honli: You also delete a few necessary "Requires:" tags.
> > honli:  Please see review-comment.txt for details.
> 
> From that doc:
> 
> > honli: Please add "Requires:" entries against rsyslog, systemd, kmod,
> > honli: logrotate, initscripts, and dracut.
> 
> None of these need to be listed explicitly, so far as I know. These are all
> things that are expected to be on the system, thus no need to call them out
> specifically. Several of them are already requirements of the kernel.
> 

I would suggest to list explicitly. Otherwise fedora-review tool will
complaint.
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/udev, /usr/share/doc
 /rdma-core-12, /etc/rsyslog.d, /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts,
 /etc/udev/rules.d, /etc/udev, /etc/logrotate.d, /usr/lib/udev/rules.d
[ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/infiniband
 (ibacm-devel, libibverbs-devel),
 /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/05rdma(rdma), /usr/include/rdma(kernel-
 headers), /etc/rdma(rdma, ibacm)

> > honli: %setup -q ???
> > %build
> 
> Why? I prefer verbose myself, so you can see more easily in logs if
> something goes wrong.

OK.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #7 from Honggang LI  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #3)
> 
> > Comment 1:
> > /etc/rc.d/init.d/srpd (delete it as RHEL7 and FC26  use systemd.)
> 
> Confused here, I don't see this in the build. Or did you mean "this is
> getting removed from the old version, but it's fine"?

Yes, it is fine.

> 
> > Comment 2: iwpmd no longer start after syslog.target, as it does not write
> > any log files. iwpmd send log message to /var/log/messages.
> > diff -Nurp iwpmd-1.0.6-2.el7/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service

> 
> Is this another "this is a change to take note of" thing? Just using the
> upstream .service file here.

Yes, you are right. It is a change to take note of.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #6 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #3)
...
> > Issue 4: broken soft link (librdmacm-12-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm)?
> > /usr/lib64/rsocket
> > [honli@dhcp47-85 rsocket]$ ll
> > total 0
> > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 honli honli 15 Dec 20 00:37 librspreload.so.1 ->
> > librspreload.so
> > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 honli honli 15 Dec 20 00:37 librspreload.so.1.0.0 ->
> > librspreload.so
> 
> This looks like an upstream problem, just doing a build in a freshly
> unpacked tree sans-rpm has similar results. I'll address it there.

There's a minor issue with the way it's built upstream that does leave it with
a dangling symlink under build/, but when packaged, this was simply a case of
the .so being in rdma-core-devel. I've moved it into librdmacm instead to
resolve this.

Updated package for review w/same version at the moment:

http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core.spec
http://people.redhat.com/~jwilson/pkgreview/rdma-core/rdma-core-12-1.fc26.src.rpm

This should hopefully address just about everything, and I'll ship the patches
that resulted from this work upstream shortly.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #5 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #4)
> Spec file comments from honli:
> 
> Url: https://github.com/linux-rdma/rdma-core
> honli:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code
> honli: Please add comment for the "Source:" tag.
> Source: rdma-core-%{version}.tgz

I could, but this situation is temporary, there will be an upstream release and
a full URL shortly. This was noted in comment #1, but I could add that same
text to the spec until the release is out if need be.

> BuildRequires: binutils
> BuildRequires: cmake >= 2.8.11
> BuildRequires: gcc
> BuildRequires: libudev-devel
> BuildRequires: pkgconfig
> BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-3.0)
> BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-route-3.0)
> BuildRequires: valgrind-devel
> 
> honli: libnl3-devel is required for iwpmd libibverbs

That's what you get from pkgconfig(libnl-3.0).

> honli: systemd and dracut also needed.

These already get pulled in.

> honli: You also delete a few necessary "Requires:" tags.
> honli:  Please see review-comment.txt for details.

From that doc:

> honli: Please add "Requires:" entries against rsyslog, systemd, kmod,
> honli: logrotate, initscripts, and dracut.

None of these need to be listed explicitly, so far as I know. These are all
things that are expected to be on the system, thus no need to call them out
specifically. Several of them are already requirements of the kernel.


> %description
> RDMA core userspace infrastructure and documentation.
> honli: I know this is an upstream issue. This is %description
> honli: section is too simple, in other words, it is meaningless.
> honli: If you do not have good %description section, I suggest
> honli: you copy and paste
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043#c0
> honli: At least, user will know what is the package after read that.

That #c0 text applies to the package as a whole though, including things that
are in libibverbs. I'll expand on the text there a bit though.

Proposed update:

%description
RDMA core userspace infrastructure and documentation, including initscripts,
kernel driver-specific modprobe override configs, IPoIB network scripts,
dracut rules, and the rdma-ndd utility.

> %package -n libibverbs
> Summary: A library and drivers for direct userspace use of RDMA
> (InfiniBand/iWARP) hardware
> Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig
> Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig
> Requires: rdma-core
> honli: Even over 99% files are stext files, rdma-core contains
> /usr/sbin/rdma-ndd,
> honli: which is an ELF file, so rdma-core is not a noarch rpm. Please
> replace all
> honli: "Requires: rdma-core" with "Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
> %{version}-%{release}"

Will do.

> %description -n srp_daemon
> In conjunction with the kernel ib_srp driver, srptools allows you to
> honli: should replace srptools with srp_daemon in above line?
> discover and use SCSI devices via the SCSI RDMA Protocol over InfiniBand.

Done.

> %prep
> %setup
> honli: %setup -q ???
> %build

Why? I prefer verbose myself, so you can see more easily in logs if something
goes wrong.

> %postun -n ibacm
> %systemd_postun_with_restart ibacm.service
> 
> honli: Why you only run
> systemd_post/systemd_preun/systemd_postun_with_restart
> honli: against ibacm.service? How about iwpmd.service and srp_daemon.service?

Looks like an oversight, will correct this.

> %post -n libibcm -p /sbin/ldconfig
> %postun -n libibcm -p /sbin/ldconfig
> honli: Why not run ldconfig for other libraries, at least librdmacm has .so
> honli: file in private dir.

Another oversight. And on a related note, the ldconfigs for the base package
serve no purpose, since there are no libs in it. This is probably a remnant of
starting from the one-shot spec in the top level of the source dir. Will fix
this up too.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #4 from Jarod Wilson  ---
Spec file comments from honli:

Url: https://github.com/linux-rdma/rdma-core
honli:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#When_Upstream_uses_Prohibited_Code
honli: Please add comment for the "Source:" tag.
Source: rdma-core-%{version}.tgz

BuildRequires: binutils
BuildRequires: cmake >= 2.8.11
BuildRequires: gcc
BuildRequires: libudev-devel
BuildRequires: pkgconfig
BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-3.0)
BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libnl-route-3.0)
BuildRequires: valgrind-devel

honli: libnl3-devel is required for iwpmd libibverbs
honli: systemd and dracut also needed.

honli: You also delete a few necessary "Requires:" tags.
honli:  Please see review-comment.txt for details.

%description
RDMA core userspace infrastructure and documentation.
honli: I know this is an upstream issue. This is %description
honli: section is too simple, in other words, it is meaningless.
honli: If you do not have good %description section, I suggest
honli: you copy and paste
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043#c0
honli: At least, user will know what is the package after read that.

%package -n libibverbs
Summary: A library and drivers for direct userspace use of RDMA
(InfiniBand/iWARP) hardware
Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig
Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig
Requires: rdma-core
honli: Even over 99% files are stext files, rdma-core contains
/usr/sbin/rdma-ndd,
honli: which is an ELF file, so rdma-core is not a noarch rpm. Please replace
all
honli: "Requires: rdma-core" with "Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}"

%description -n srp_daemon
In conjunction with the kernel ib_srp driver, srptools allows you to
honli: should replace srptools with srp_daemon in above line?
discover and use SCSI devices via the SCSI RDMA Protocol over InfiniBand.

%prep
%setup
honli: %setup -q ???
%build

%postun -n ibacm
%systemd_postun_with_restart ibacm.service

honli: Why you only run systemd_post/systemd_preun/systemd_postun_with_restart
honli: against ibacm.service? How about iwpmd.service and srp_daemon.service?

%post -n libibcm -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -n libibcm -p /sbin/ldconfig
honli: Why not run ldconfig for other libraries, at least librdmacm has .so
honli: file in private dir.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #3 from Jarod Wilson  ---
(In reply to Jarod Wilson from comment #2)
> From honli via email, pasting here for all to see:
> 
> Issue 1: see line 11
> honli@dhcp47-85:~/b1404043/1404043-rdma-core/srpm-unpacked/rdma-core-12$ cat
> -n MAINTAINERS 
>  1List of maintainers
>  2
>  3  Generally patches should be submitted to the main development
> mailing list:
>  4
>  5  linux-r...@vger.kernel.org
>  6
>  7  Descriptions of section entries:
>  8  F: Files and directories with wildcard patterns.
>  9 A trailing slash includes all files and subdirectory
> files.
> 10 F:   providers/mlx4/ all files in and below
> providers/mlx4/
> 11 F:   providers/* all files in drivers/net, but not
> below < drivers/net???

Upstream typo. Will send a patch.


> Issue 2: Why remove the manpage?
> [honli@dhcp47-85 srp]$ diff -Nurp
> ./usr/lib/systemd/system/srp_daemon.service
> /home/honli/rhel-scm/srptools/srptools.service 
> --- ./usr/lib/systemd/system/srp_daemon.service   2016-12-19
> 03:48:07.774866479 -0500
> +++ /home/honli/rhel-scm/srptools/srptools.service2016-04-11
> 21:33:29.905060849 -0400
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>  [Unit]
>  Description=Start or stop the daemon that attaches to SRP devices
> -Documentation=man:srp_daemon file:/etc/rdma/rdma.conf
> file:/etc/srp_daemon.conf
> +Documentation=file:///etc/rdma/rdma.conf file:///etc/srp_daemon.conf
>  DefaultDependencies=false
>  Conflicts=emergency.target emergency.service
>  Requires=rdma.service

Already since resolved upstream, commit
9317fbb01ac2ef33a4570c66b1e651ab71d07b90.


> Issue 3: please use the new name
> 189 %description -n srp_daemon
> 190 In conjunction with the kernel ib_srp driver, srptools allows you to
> <--- s/srptools/srp_daemon/
> 191 discover and use SCSI devices via the SCSI RDMA Protocol over InfiniBand.

Will send a patch upstream.

> Issue 4: broken soft link (librdmacm-12-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm)?
> /usr/lib64/rsocket
> [honli@dhcp47-85 rsocket]$ ll
> total 0
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 honli honli 15 Dec 20 00:37 librspreload.so.1 ->
> librspreload.so
> lrwxrwxrwx. 1 honli honli 15 Dec 20 00:37 librspreload.so.1.0.0 ->
> librspreload.so

This looks like an upstream problem, just doing a build in a freshly unpacked
tree sans-rpm has similar results. I'll address it there.

> Issue 5: missing BuildRequires

This was better explained elsewhere, it's really just "don't explicitly list
gcc" here, which I'll send a patch upstream for.

> Issue 6: missing "Requires: tags"
> Please see comment-rdma-core.spec.

Will address this separately shortly.

> Question 1:
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/srpd.service --> 
> /usr/lib/systemd/system/srp_daemon.service
> The service had been named as "srpd" since 2009, should we keep the old name?

I'd stick with following upstream.

> Question 2: why libibacmp.so.* removed for new ibacm-12-1.fc26 pkg?
> (libibcm.f26 keeps libibcm.so.1.0.12)
>14 /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so|   14
> /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so
>15 /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so.1  | 
> -
>16 /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so.1.0.0  | 
> -

This is an upstream change as well. I believe libibacmp is only intended for
internal use by ibacm.

> Comment 1:
> /etc/rc.d/init.d/srpd (delete it as RHEL7 and FC26  use systemd.)

Confused here, I don't see this in the build. Or did you mean "this is getting
removed from the old version, but it's fine"?

> Comment 2: iwpmd no longer start after syslog.target, as it does not write
> any log files. iwpmd send log message to /var/log/messages.
> diff -Nurp iwpmd-1.0.6-2.el7/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service
> iwpmd-12-1.fc26/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service
> --- iwpmd-1.0.6-2.el7/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service  2016-12-19
> 20:55:43.38756 -0500
> +++ iwpmd-12-1.fc26/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service2016-12-19
> 20:56:55.874779421 -0500
> @@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
>  [Unit]
> -Description=Starts the IWPMD daemon
> -Documentation=file:///usr/share/doc/iwpmd/README
> -After=network.target syslog.target  <---
> +Description=iWarp Port Mapper
> +Documentation=man:iwpmd file:/etc/iwpmd.conf
> +After=network.target

Is this another "this is a change to take note of" thing? Just using the
upstream .service file here.

> Comment 3:
> AUTHORS files had been removed, but we have a new file "MAINTAINERS" for
> such info.

Indeed.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #2 from Jarod Wilson  ---
From honli via email, pasting here for all to see:

Issue 1: see line 11
honli@dhcp47-85:~/b1404043/1404043-rdma-core/srpm-unpacked/rdma-core-12$ cat -n
MAINTAINERS 
 1List of maintainers
 2
 3  Generally patches should be submitted to the main development mailing
list:
 4
 5  linux-r...@vger.kernel.org
 6
 7  Descriptions of section entries:
 8  F: Files and directories with wildcard patterns.
 9 A trailing slash includes all files and subdirectory files.
10 F:   providers/mlx4/ all files in and below providers/mlx4/
11 F:   providers/* all files in drivers/net, but not below
< drivers/net???
12 F:   */net/* all files in "any top level
directory"/net
13 One pattern per line.  Multiple F: lines acceptable.



Issue 2: Why remove the manpage?
[honli@dhcp47-85 srp]$ diff -Nurp ./usr/lib/systemd/system/srp_daemon.service
/home/honli/rhel-scm/srptools/srptools.service 
--- ./usr/lib/systemd/system/srp_daemon.service2016-12-19
03:48:07.774866479 -0500
+++ /home/honli/rhel-scm/srptools/srptools.service2016-04-11
21:33:29.905060849 -0400
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 [Unit]
 Description=Start or stop the daemon that attaches to SRP devices
-Documentation=man:srp_daemon file:/etc/rdma/rdma.conf
file:/etc/srp_daemon.conf
+Documentation=file:///etc/rdma/rdma.conf file:///etc/srp_daemon.conf
 DefaultDependencies=false
 Conflicts=emergency.target emergency.service
 Requires=rdma.service
[honli@dhcp47-85 srp]$ 

Issue 3: please use the new name
189 %description -n srp_daemon
190 In conjunction with the kernel ib_srp driver, srptools allows you to <---
s/srptools/srp_daemon/
191 discover and use SCSI devices via the SCSI RDMA Protocol over InfiniBand.


Issue 4: broken soft link (librdmacm-12-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm)?
/usr/lib64/rsocket
[honli@dhcp47-85 rsocket]$ ll
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 honli honli 15 Dec 20 00:37 librspreload.so.1 -> librspreload.so
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 honli honli 15 Dec 20 00:37 librspreload.so.1.0.0 ->
librspreload.so



Issue 5: missing BuildRequires
dracut missing  libipathverbs,libmlx4
libnl3-devel, missing iwpmd libibverbs
systemd missing iwpmd, ibacm, srptools
systemd-units missing
valgrind-devel yes

ibacm-devel
libibumad-devel
libibverbs-devel

chrpath missing
autoconf missing
automake, missing
libtool missing
glibc-static  missing  libibumad


Issue 6: missing "Requires: tags"
Please see comment-rdma-core.spec.

Question 1:
/usr/lib/systemd/system/srpd.service --> 
/usr/lib/systemd/system/srp_daemon.service
The service had been named as "srpd" since 2009, should we keep the old name?

Question 2: why libibacmp.so.* removed for new ibacm-12-1.fc26 pkg?
(libibcm.f26 keeps libibcm.so.1.0.12)
   14 /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so|   14
/usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so
   15 /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so.1  | 
-
   16 /usr/lib64/ibacm/libibacmp.so.1.0.0  | 
-




Comment 1:
/etc/rc.d/init.d/srpd (delete it as RHEL7 and FC26  use systemd.)

Comment 2: iwpmd no longer start after syslog.target, as it does not write any
log files. iwpmd send log message to /var/log/messages.
diff -Nurp iwpmd-1.0.6-2.el7/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service
iwpmd-12-1.fc26/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service
--- iwpmd-1.0.6-2.el7/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service  2016-12-19
20:55:43.38756 -0500
+++ iwpmd-12-1.fc26/usr/lib/systemd/system/iwpmd.service2016-12-19
20:56:55.874779421 -0500
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 [Unit]
-Description=Starts the IWPMD daemon
-Documentation=file:///usr/share/doc/iwpmd/README
-After=network.target syslog.target  <---
+Description=iWarp Port Mapper
+Documentation=man:iwpmd file:/etc/iwpmd.conf
+After=network.target

Comment 3:
AUTHORS files had been removed, but we have a new file "MAINTAINERS" for such
info.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043

Honggang LI  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ho...@redhat.com



-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1404043] Review Request: rdma-core - RDMA core userspace libraries and daemons

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1404043



--- Comment #1 from Jarod Wilson  ---
There isn't an upstream rdma-core release just yet, so the tarball was
generated using:

$ git archive --prefix rdma-core-12/ --output
~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/rdma-core-12.tgz HEAD

A release corresponding to kernel 4.9 is expected soon, I believe.

-- 
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org