pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] pcp updates: ipv6

To: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] pcp updates: ipv6
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 05:24:16 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <513EF1BB.6050407@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>

----- Original Message -----
> On 12/03/13 13:41, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > Changes committed to git://oss.sgi.com/pcp/pcp.git dev
> > ...
> >   build/rpm/fedora.spec   |    3
> 
> 
> This one is created in the build and should not be in the git tree
> ...
> if you made changes here, they probably belong in fedora.spec.head.in
> or fedora.spec.tail.
> 

Yeah, I had to change that (24824f932544a6f391187c3e36205d53f6de48a9)
to get the rpm packaging to work.  The fedora spec in general is just
a copy of the spec used in other processes, its not really useful for
us to generate it.  Even beyond that though, the strategy of reusing
the debian script directly proved impossible (see above commit).

I've been keeping it in the tree so people have the chance to add new
dependencies etc as the add new code (like Frank did for systemd, which
was really handy over the weekend!)

> Similarly for qa/062.out ... if you have 062.out.1, 062.out.1234 and
> 062.out.4321, then 062.out should not be there.
> 
> And the same problem is evident for qa/499.out.
> 
> And I'd expect to see 062.out and qa/499.out added to qa/.gitignore.
> 

Hmmm, I'll leave these to Dave to review and sort out, I missed those
on my glance over his changes this morning.

thanks.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>