https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2351539
--- Comment #28 from Terje Rosten <[email protected]> --- > Does %autosetup, without the -n option, handle the case when the upstream > version is different from the package version, > such as for release candidates, e.g. '1.1.0- rc3' (upstream) vs '1.1.0~rc3' > (RPM)? %autosetup supports the -n option (like %setup) if you need that at later point. > am also wondering about dropping the %{_isa} from the Requires for the > 'devel' sub-package. It seems to me, that the %{_isa} would be needed here. > For example, > you might have, say 'libomp_devel.i686' installed on an x86_64 host, but you > could not use that with the 'redisx-devel.x86_64' package when linking. > You would need to install `libomp.x86_64' specifically... I think you are right, adding %{_isa} is fine, however koji and copr etc don't this to operate correctly. Changes looks good, the sole thing left are these Requires: Source0: https://github.com/Smithsonian/redisx/archive/refs/tags/v%{upstream_version}.tar.gz Requires: libxchange%{_isa} >= 1.0.1 Requires: openssl%{_isa} Requires: popt%{_isa} Requires: readline%{_isa} rpmbuild will produce deps to libfoo.so* as seen from: redisx (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libbsd.so.0()(64bit) libbsd.so.0(LIBBSD_0.2)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libgomp.so.1()(64bit) libgomp.so.1(GOMP_4.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(OMP_1.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpopt.so.0()(64bit) libpopt.so.0(LIBPOPT_0)(64bit) libreadline.so.8()(64bit) libredisx.so.1()(64bit) libssl.so.3()(64bit) libssl.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit) libxchange(x86-64) libxchange.so.1()(64bit) openssl(x86-64) popt(x86-64) readline(x86-64) rtld(GNU_HASH) so you can safely remove these requires lines. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2351539 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202351539%23c28 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
