Re: Question regarding jpp6 and jpp5

Not to belabor the point but if you don't think the rpm query was
sufficient to show you the problem was resolved, you don't understand
what the problem was. The basic issue is that rpm.org has released
multiple incompatible versions of rpm that have been used in various
fedora versions. Due to the nature of RHEL release cycles none of
these rpm versions have been in a RHEL released product (as of this
writing and RHEL 5.4). The point at which things started to become
problematic depending on usage was the rpm.org 4.6 release iirc, and
4.7 and 4.8 have introduced various new incompatibilities. You can
view their release notes for the gory details. At any rate, a
4.4.x(.y.z) built rpm should rebuild fine on at least any version of
rhel 4.x and up, and I believe it will even work on 2.x and up (though
I have no virtual machines of those to test).

So for quick reference: no current RHEL release has a rpm version
greater 4.4, and no recent fedora version has a version less than 4.6.

The reason we had problems before is because our buildroots for JPP
5.0 are centos based, and when we started 6.0 we had a fedora
buildroot. We've since reverted to the centos root, and that resolved
the problem for all new builds. However we may have missed some
packages in the mass rebuild (always a possibility) so if you see
packages that either a) don't rebuild, or b) show a RPMVERSION query
tag of something 4.6 or greater, please let us know so we can rebuild
it.

Jason

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Jason Corley <[email protected]> wrote:
>> hrm, the SRPM issue should have been fixed... Checking the last 6.0
>> package I see fly by on the jpackage server shows:
>>
>> [jasonc@ryu ~]$ rpm -qp --qf '%{N} %{RPMVERSION}\n' ~jpackage/dist
>> /6.0/generic/free/RPMS/ant-1.8.0-4.jpp6.noarch.rpm
>> ant 4.4.2.3
>>
>> A 4.4.2.3 built RPM should rebuild without issue on RHEL5. Are there
>> specific packages that you see that need a rebuild?
>> Jason
>
> My testbox is back online, and I've tested with it. The SRPM issue has
> been fixed from JPackage, thanks. I assume you're building them on an
> older OS now.
>
> As I'd said, an rpm query wasn't sufficient. The problems involved
> actually extracting or installing the RPM or SRPM not just running a
> query. The problem still exists for Fedora SRPMS.
> _______________________________________________
> JPackage-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
>