[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lemen...@gmail.com Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #17 from Andy Cress 2009-11-20 16:46:47 EDT --- The new src.rpm is now at http://ipmiutil.sourceforge.net/FILES/ipmiutil-2.5.1-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #16 from Andy Cress 2009-11-20 15:54:44 EDT --- The gzip was an artifact from older version that wasn't needed, but hadn't caused problems before. I've taken it out now, and cleaned up more stuff in the spec file. I have moved any distro-specific logic from the spec file and handled it via configure.in. Those changes are now committed to SVN, the updated spec file is at http://ipmiutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ipmiutil/trunk/doc/ipmiutil.spec and this will be included in ipmiutil-2.5.1 soon. I have also applied to be a Fedora packager (as user arcress). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||BuildFails --- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-11-07 21:57:49 EDT --- The package in comment 14 fails to build for me: + cd /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ipmiutil-2.4.3-1.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8 + gzip -f '*.8' gzip: *.8: No such file or directory I'm not sure what's gone wrong, but do note that you shouldn't try to compress the manpages yourself; rpmbuild will do it automatically. The %ifarch doesn't seem at all relevant to Fedora, and I have to admit that I can't understand why you would define all of those macros that are pretty much the same as existing macros or are longer than the strings they replace. I don't understand the purpose of %pre; packages cannot produce output in scriptlets, so the whole thing seems to be pointless. And the checks for SuSE and Montavista in %post have no place in Fedora. Many other portions of the scriptlets don't seem relevant to Fedora. Please clear the whiteboard when you have a package which builds. I checked the account system and it looks like you are not in the packager group, so I've indicated that you need a sponsor. Please read through http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers for more information on becoming a Fedora packager. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #14 from Andy Cress 2009-09-14 14:20:50 EDT --- The BuildRequires: openssl-devel was added in ipmiutil-2.4.2 and later. The current release is now ipmiutil-2.4.3, see SPEC URL: http://ipmiutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ipmiutil/trunk/doc/ipmiutil.spec SRC RPM URL: http://ipmiutil.sourceforge.net/FILES/ipmiutil-2.4.3-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #13 from Andy Cress 2009-08-21 10:44:09 EDT --- It does depend upon openssl-devel, and that should be checked. I'll add that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-08-20 18:10:19 EDT --- I took a look at the package from comment #9. Unfortunately it failed to build in rawhide: if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../.. -I. -I./inc -g -O2 -MT lanplus.o -MD -MP -MF ".deps/lanplus.Tpo" -c -o lanplus.o lanplus.c; \ then mv -f ".deps/lanplus.Tpo" ".deps/lanplus.Po"; else rm -f ".deps/lanplus.Tpo"; exit 1; fi lanplus.c:70:26: error: openssl/rand.h: No such file or directory make[3]: *** [lanplus.o] Error 1 Perhaps a missing build dependency? A scratch build with a full log is at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1618755 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 Dan Horák changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW AssignedTo|d...@danny.cz|nob...@fedoraproject.org Flag|fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(d...@danny.cz) | --- Comment #11 from Dan Horák 2009-08-17 03:28:55 EDT --- Andy, I am sorry, but I must step down as the reviewer. I am very busy with other work and can't dedicate the required amount of time for this review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 Andy Cress changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(d...@danny.cz) --- Comment #10 from Andy Cress 2009-07-21 12:24:18 EDT --- Dan, Any feedback on the latest SPEC & SRC RPM from ipmiutil-2.4.0? I think this should be much better wrt compliance, perhaps sufficient. Andy -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #9 from Andy Cress 2009-06-25 14:28:10 EDT --- ipmiutil-2.4.0 is now released with some updates for Fedora issues. SPEC URL: http://ipmiutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ipmiutil/trunk/doc/ipmiutil.spec SRC RPM URL: http://ipmiutil.sourceforge.net/FILES/ipmiutil-2.4.0-1.src.rpm I moved the ipmi_port and events binaries to /usr/sbin, and changed 'events' to 'ievents'. I moved the init.d and cron scripts from the data directory to go directly into /etc/rc.d/init.d and /etc/cron.daily via the %files rather than copying them in %post. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #8 from Dan Horák 2009-02-18 06:52:25 EDT --- It is stuck on me :-( I have few ideas, but there is still a lot of work before it can be accepted into Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #7 from Prarit Bhargava 2009-02-18 06:32:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > Dan, > > SPEC URL: > http://ipmiutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ipmiutil/trunk/doc/ipmiutil.spec?view=markup > SRC RPM URL: http://ipmiutil.sourceforge.net/FILES/ipmiutil-2.3.2-1.src.rpm > > RE Fedora-only spec files: I think there are lots of counter-examples of > projects in Fedora that have support for other distros (net-snmp for one), > which certainly makes sense for the project maintainers. Certainly we both > want to make the spec file as simple as possible. > > I could move the MIB and cron files from %post into the %files section, and > that would probably work for the init.d scripts as well. > > I'll move the two binaries in question to /usr/sbin like the others, but I'll > have to change 'events' to 'ievents'. And if I change some command names, > this > will have an impact on some legacy users, so the version will have to bump to > 2.4.0 or 3.0.0 when these changes are made. Hey Andrew, just wondering where things are with this? If you need any help please let me know. I'd like to see this get into F11 (which will be the base for RHEL6!). P. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 Andrew Cress changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrew.r.cr...@intel.com --- Comment #6 from Andrew Cress 2008-12-19 08:44:21 EDT --- Dan, SPEC URL: http://ipmiutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ipmiutil/trunk/doc/ipmiutil.spec?view=markup SRC RPM URL: http://ipmiutil.sourceforge.net/FILES/ipmiutil-2.3.2-1.src.rpm RE Fedora-only spec files: I think there are lots of counter-examples of projects in Fedora that have support for other distros (net-snmp for one), which certainly makes sense for the project maintainers. Certainly we both want to make the spec file as simple as possible. I could move the MIB and cron files from %post into the %files section, and that would probably work for the init.d scripts as well. I'll move the two binaries in question to /usr/sbin like the others, but I'll have to change 'events' to 'ievents'. And if I change some command names, this will have an impact on some legacy users, so the version will have to bump to 2.4.0 or 3.0.0 when these changes are made. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #5 from Dan Horák 2008-12-17 08:16:56 EDT --- Please prepare a new srpm and spec file for download so I can continue in the review (with updated Version and/or Release). Fedora prefers small clean spec files without support for other distros, because the use of miscellaneous conditions lowers the legibility and can lead to errors. The present usage of pre/post scripts is wrong, the MIBs and cron files all have their proper (and stable) place in the system and their installation and removing is done by standard means of the rpm program, it can even react on user modified files (e.g. save copies). Some locations are standardized in LSB or FHS, so they are even stable within multiple distros. All binaries that are supposed to be run directly by a (super-)user must live in "bin" or "sbin". Test or demo scripts not required for proper function of a package can be marked and stored as %doc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931
--- Comment #4 from Andy Cress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-12-10 15:04:34 EDT ---
Dan,
Thanks for the input. I've started on these items, and have committed the
changes so far into the project svn.
(http://ipmiutil.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ipmiutil/trunk/doc/ipmiutil.spec?view=markup)
- the Source tag has wrong format
A: fixed in the ipmiutil.spec in svn
- "%ifarch x86_pentium3 x86_pentium4" is useless on Fedora
A: yes, inert for Fedora, but required for the MontaVista distro
- the %ifarch to %define LibDir - use only %{_libdir} in the spec
A: fixed in ipmiutil.spec
- do not use absolute paths, use macros %{_{bin,sbin,lib,...}dir}
A: changed in ipmiutil.spec
- do not check whether %{buildroot} == "/" in %install and %clean
A: fixed in ipmiutil.spec
- do not gzip man pages, it is done automagically
A: does this mean that the installed files should be *.8? What process does
this (at rpm install time, perhaps)?
- drop the %pre and %post scripts almost completely, rely on the content that
Fedora provides (we have net-snmp, specific location for MIBs, ...), they
should contain handling of the install shared library (call ldconfig) and take
care of initscript
A: significant changes, and removing some stuff. How should I detect the MIB
directory, if present?
- use only the new names for utils (i_*) to prevent conflicts with other
packages
A: I removed the symlinks for commands, there are back-compatibility issues
here, this may need further investigation.
The rpmlint output with the updated spec file:
# rpmlint ipmiutil-2.3.2-1.i386.rpm
E: ipmiutil arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/ipmiutil/ipmi_port
E: ipmiutil arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share /usr/share/ipmiutil/events
W: ipmiutil dangerous-command-in-%post ln
W: ipmiutil dangerous-command-in-%postun rm
#
So where should extra ipmiutil-specific binaries go? They do not need to be in
the PATH, IMO. I tried several locations, but rpmlint wasn't happy with my
choices.
The last warning seems frivilous to me, it seems removing extra stuff should be
allowed in %postun.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931
Dan Horák <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Dan Horák <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-12-08 08:54:48 EDT ---
Hi Andy,
I will do the review, but the recent spec needs a lot of work to be acceptable
for Fedora. Please get comfortable with
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines and other docs at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers#Packaging
- the Source tag has wrong format -
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net
- "%ifarch x86_pentium3 x86_pentium4" is useless on Fedora
- the %ifarch to %define LibDir - use only %{_libdir} in the spec
- do not use absolute paths, use macros %{_{bin,sbin,lib,...}dir}
- do not check whether %{buildroot} == "/" in %install and %clean
- do not gzip man pages, it is done automagically
- drop the %pre and %post scripts almost completely, rely on the content that
Fedora provides (we have net-snmp, specific location for MIBs, ...), they
should contain handling of the install shared library (call ldconfig) and take
care of initscript
- use only the new names for utils (i_*) to prevent conflicts with other
packages
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #2 from Andy Cress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-11-05 10:52:50 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=322599) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=322599) A comparison of common IPMI open source packages A good question that I have been asked before. There is significant overlap between the two, with the key difference being the architectural approach: ipmiutil is more top-down with the focus being to optimize common management tasks, while ipmitool is more bottom-up with the focus being to expose granular IPMI features. ipmiutil was started in 2001, while ipmitool was started in 2003. Attached is my assessment of a feature comparison, including the relative advantages of each. There are precedents for making more than one choice available in the same space, and given that ipmiutil currently has a significant installed base, it makes sense to include it in Fedora, since SLES, MontaVista, and RedFlag have also included it. ipmiutil project stats, avg over last 60 days: (as of 11/04/08) 325 Hits/day 134 Pages/day 28.3 MB/day 9.4 Downloads/day -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #1 from Bill Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-11-04 14:56:30 EDT --- How does this differ in general from ipmitool? There seems to be quite a bit of overlap here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 Andy Cress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://ipmiutil.sourceforge ||.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
