由 tacy_lee 在 06-03-2003 17:33 发表:
**samba &ldap **
在rh9下面编译samba-2.2.8a，设置了--with-ldapsam，有如下错误出现：
1： checking for unpackaged file(s):/usr/lib/rpm/check-
files /var/tem/samba
2： error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
3： /usr/bin/pdbedit
4： RPM build errors:
5： Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found：
6： /usr/bin/pdbedit
多谢！
由 tacy_lee 在 06-03-2003 20:16 发表:
up
由 tacy_lee 在 06-03-2003 20:28 发表:
解决
Unpackaged files message in RPM-4.1 and following
RPM version 4.1 and following demonstrate a new behaviour in the rpmbuild process. Previously, a build process might place any number of files, say in the %install stanza, when running the make install part of a Makefile, in the customary /var/tmp/%{name}-root/ BuildRoot (the RPM_BUILD_ROOT). Once through that part of the Makefile, it can then completely ignore these files in the %files binary packaging stanza.
This often happens when an upstream maintainer adds, or deletes items from new directory spurs in the make install , and the change might be missed during an unattended or automated rebuild. This option permits careful packagers to cross check the quality of their packaging.
So as a cross check, /usr/lib/rpm/check-files is now enabled during the %files stanza, to help a packager identify possibly omitted files. This obviously will disclose breakage in existing .SPEC files, but this should be a reasonably plainless transition as the specfile packager amends them to properly account for all expected files.
Obviously some maintaining packagers will take some time to complete the process for their packages; in the interim, for the causal package builder, Jeff Johnson offered this advice.
-- R P Herrold,
1<herrold@owlriver.com>, Editor
2
3
4
5
6
7\--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8
9Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 18:42:44 -0400
10
11From: Jeff Johnson <jbj@redhat.com>
12
13Reply-To: rpm-list@redhat.com
14
15To: rpm-list@redhat.com
16
17Subject: rh-rpm] Re: Advised wanted on building perl module rpms
18
19
20
21On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 11:34:29PM +0100, Mark C wrote:
22
23> Hi,
24
25>
26
27> I'm building a perl-SDL rpm, I have successfully got it to compile and
28
29> build as per my spec file (now I have a headache :-) as it kept wanting
30
31> to install itself into the proper destination directory).
32
33>
34
35> Anyway when the build finished, it spate out a warning regarding files
36
37> found, but not packaged, the error below:
38
39>
40
41> Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
42
43> /var/tmp/rpmbuild/perl-SDL-root
44
45> warning: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
46
47> /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.0/i386-linux-thread-multi/perllocal.pod
48
49>
50
51
52
53A pod file? That possibly should be included in the rpm, but I know as little as possible about perl :-)
54
55
56
57Meanwhile, this is new behavior in rpm-4.1, detecting built but unpackaged files. The default behavior (if you don't have redhat-rpm-config installed), is to stop the build.
58
59
60
61The "fix" is to either
62
631) include the file in a package (or equivalently do
64
65
66
67rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/path/to/file
68
69
70
71in %install).
72
73
74
752) Reconfigure to warn, not stop, the build. The relevant macro(s) are (from /usr/lib/rpm/macros):
76
77
78
79
80
81#
82
83# Script gets packaged file list on input and buildroot as first parameter.
84
85# Returns list of unpackaged files, i.e. files in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT not packaged.
86
87#
88
89# Note: Disable (by commenting out) for legacy compatibility.
90
91%__check_files /usr/lib/rpm/check-files %{buildroot}
92
93
94
95#
96
97# Should unpackaged files in a build root terminate a build?
98
99#
100
101# Note: The default value</jbj@redhat.com></herrold@owlriver.com>