View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0004701CentOS-6virt-toppublic2011-07-05 20:25
Status acknowledgedResolutionopen 
Product VersionPre Release 
Target VersionFixed in Version 
Summary0004701: Will not build from rhel-6 repository
Descriptionocaml-camomile-data is required by Spec file from src rpm. This is not included in rhel-6. This was reported by Levente Farkas upstream
Additional InformationIt can be built by including ocaml-camomile-data-0.7.2-2.fc13 in the repository or patching the spec to remove the requirement as recommended by the UpStream packager
TagsNo tags attached.


2011-01-08 20:31


virt-top.spec.patch (356 bytes)
--- virt-top.spec.orig	2011-01-08 13:14:08.670048365 -0600
+++ virt-top.spec	2011-01-08 13:15:04.011142389 -0600
@@ -30,9 +30,6 @@
 # Tortuous list of BRs for gettext.
 BuildRequires:  ocaml-gettext-devel >= 0.3.3
 BuildRequires:  ocaml-fileutils-devel
-%ifnarch ppc64
-BuildRequires:  ocaml-camomile-data
 # For msgfmt:
 BuildRequires:  gettext
virt-top.spec.patch (356 bytes)


2011-01-08 20:45

manager   ~0012305

Patching the spec file is not an option here because CentOS is supposed to be binary compatible, bug for bug, as stated by Karanbir in this -devel mailing list:


2011-01-09 05:02

reporter   ~0012308

agreed, The patch is not an option for the distribution binary, but will provide a working binary for those who build their own without changing their binary repository.


2011-01-13 05:28

reporter   ~0012337

After further review of the RH bugzilla id-661783 the RedHat Packager stated that this is a bogus dependency. It is not needed for virt-top, so why pollute the repository when the patch simply removes the bogus dependency. This is not a case of replicating a bug in the binary but simply a clean up of a source spec file.

2011-01-13 23:31

administrator   ~0012348


Thanks for your help on this issue.

The main issue from my end is : how certain are we that the dep does not cause a change in the binary output of the resulting rpmbuild. In other words, its possible that the package will build with and without that dependancy; however will the resulting packages be identical.

Also, keep in mind one thing - once a spec file is touched, it becomes a .el6.centos marked package. That specific status for the package will then not change for the life of the package ( so either till .el6 is EOL or the package is removed from the distro ).


2011-01-28 00:18

reporter   ~0012384

I note from the bugzilla reference that it lists "Fixed in version: virt-top-1.0.4-3.3.el6" where the current version is virt-top-1.0.4-3.1.el6.

This version's src RPM does not exist yet, but it does seem to indicate that all subsequent releases of this package from upstream will not be built with this package as a dependency.

This implies as well that RH does not consider removal of the dependency to break binary compatibility.


2011-01-28 00:24

reporter   ~0012385

Also, if the src RPM does appear, would it be considered to just ship the newer RPM build from upstream even though it wasn't part of the initial distribution of EL6?


2011-07-05 20:25

manager   ~0012890

Apparently fixed.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2011-01-08 20:31 hab New Issue
2011-01-08 20:31 hab File Added: virt-top.spec.patch
2011-01-08 20:45 toracat Note Added: 0012305
2011-01-08 20:45 toracat Status new => acknowledged
2011-01-09 05:02 hab Note Added: 0012308
2011-01-13 05:28 hab Note Added: 0012337
2011-01-13 23:31 Note Added: 0012348
2011-01-28 00:18 kstange Note Added: 0012384
2011-01-28 00:24 kstange Note Added: 0012385
2011-06-30 07:50 tru Relationship added has duplicate 0004932
2011-06-30 07:50 tru Relationship deleted has duplicate 0004932
2011-07-05 20:25 toracat Note Added: 0012890