<!-- 
RSS generated by JIRA (9.4.14#940014-sha1:734e6822bbf0d45eff9af51f82432957f73aa32c) at Sat Feb 10 01:33:46 UTC 2024

It is possible to restrict the fields that are returned in this document by specifying the 'field' parameter in your request.
For example, to request only the issue key and summary append 'field=key&field=summary' to the URL of your request.
-->
<rss version="0.92" >
<channel>
    <title>Whamcloud Community JIRA</title>
    <link>https://jira.whamcloud.com</link>
    <description>This file is an XML representation of an issue</description>
    <language>en-us</language>    <build-info>
        <version>9.4.14</version>
        <build-number>940014</build-number>
        <build-date>05-12-2023</build-date>
    </build-info>


<item>
            <title>[LU-3422] Lustre Client 2.3 build produces incorrect binary rpm file names</title>
                <link>https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-3422</link>
                <project id="10000" key="LU">Lustre</project>
                    <description>&lt;p&gt;Building the binary RPM from the source produced the incorrect RPM names.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://downloads.whamcloud.com/public/lustre/lustre-2.3.0/el6/client/RPMS/x86_64/&quot; class=&quot;external-link&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow noopener&quot;&gt;http://downloads.whamcloud.com/public/lustre/lustre-2.3.0/el6/client/RPMS/x86_64/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt; lustre-client-2.3.0-2.6.32_279.5.1.el6.x86_64.x86_64.rpm	&lt;br/&gt;
 lustre-client-debuginfo-2.3.0-2.6.32_279.5.1.el6.x86_64.x86_64.rpm	&lt;br/&gt;
 lustre-client-modules-2.3.0-2.6.32_279.5.1.el6.x86_64.x86_64.rpm	&lt;br/&gt;
 lustre-client-source-2.3.0-2.6.32_279.5.1.el6.x86_64.x86_64.rpm	&lt;br/&gt;
 lustre-client-tests-2.3.0-2.6.32_279.5.1.el6.x86_64.x86_64.rpm&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;With centOS 6.3, kernel-2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64, my build ended up with the same RPMs names (i.e. &lt;b&gt;x86_64.x86_64&lt;/b&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;There is nothing wrong with the macros or the SPEC file. The fact that the kernel release already has &quot;x86_64&quot; in it (2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64) resulted in RPMs name with duplicated string &quot;x86_64&quot;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Could you update the upstream file, lustre.spec.in, to correct the naming to prevent the confusion now and in the future in case the future kernel release might carry &quot;x86_64&quot;?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Suggest to replace the line:&lt;br/&gt;
  Release: %&lt;/p&gt;
{fullrelease}&lt;br/&gt;
with&lt;br/&gt;
  Release: %(bash -c &quot;echo %{fullrelease}
&lt;p&gt; | sed -e &apos;s/\.x86_64$//&apos; -e &apos;s/\.i&lt;span class=&quot;error&quot;&gt;&amp;#91;3456&amp;#93;&lt;/span&gt;86$//&apos; -e &apos;s/-smp$//&apos; -e &apos;s/-bigsmp$//&apos; -e &apos;s/-ppc64$//&apos; -e &apos;s/-default$//&apos;&quot;)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
                <environment>CentOS 6.3 - kernel-2.6.32-279.el6.x86_64</environment>
        <key id="19232">LU-3422</key>
            <summary>Lustre Client 2.3 build produces incorrect binary rpm file names</summary>
                <type id="4" iconUrl="https://jira.whamcloud.com/secure/viewavatar?size=xsmall&amp;avatarId=11310&amp;avatarType=issuetype">Improvement</type>
                                            <priority id="4" iconUrl="https://jira.whamcloud.com/images/icons/priorities/minor.svg">Minor</priority>
                        <status id="5" iconUrl="https://jira.whamcloud.com/images/icons/statuses/resolved.png" description="A resolution has been taken, and it is awaiting verification by reporter. From here issues are either reopened, or are closed.">Resolved</status>
                    <statusCategory id="3" key="done" colorName="success"/>
                                    <resolution id="2">Won&apos;t Fix</resolution>
                                        <assignee username="mdiep">Minh Diep</assignee>
                                    <reporter username="n16490">Young Jong Pao</reporter>
                        <labels>
                    </labels>
                <created>Thu, 30 May 2013 16:52:48 +0000</created>
                <updated>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:47:58 +0000</updated>
                            <resolved>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 18:47:58 +0000</resolved>
                                    <version>Lustre 2.3.0</version>
                                                        <due></due>
                            <votes>0</votes>
                                    <watches>6</watches>
                                                                            <comments>
                            <comment id="59670" author="pjones" created="Thu, 30 May 2013 17:51:06 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;Minh&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Could you please comment?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thanks&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Peter&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                            <comment id="59682" author="mdiep" created="Thu, 30 May 2013 18:40:44 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;yes, we are aware of this. I&apos;d like to check with Brian to see if there&apos;s any issue.&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                            <comment id="60759" author="n16490" created="Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:32:36 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;Minh,&lt;br/&gt;
I am following up to see whether this naming will be corrected in the future or not, and whether this has caused confusion or issues among vendors/customers. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thanks.&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                            <comment id="60761" author="brian" created="Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:45:33 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;Strictly speaking, given our current policy, this duplication of the arch is not a bug and is the intended behaviour (ugly or not).  This is because the first x86_64 is actually part of the official kernel version/release string, which is embedded into the release string of the Lustre RPMs.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Should we decide to correct this, I think the situation needs to be examined in more detail and addressed in a more comprehensive manner than just stripping possible strings out of the fullversion macro.&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                            <comment id="60886" author="n16490" created="Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:41:32 +0000"  >&lt;p&gt;Brian,&lt;br/&gt;
Thanks for your quick response to the matter. Since it is the intended behaviour I would suggest to close this &lt;a href=&quot;https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-3422&quot; title=&quot;Lustre Client 2.3 build produces incorrect binary rpm file names&quot; class=&quot;issue-link&quot; data-issue-key=&quot;LU-3422&quot;&gt;&lt;del&gt;LU-3422&lt;/del&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. We&apos;d explain to our customers if confusion persists. Thank you.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Young&lt;/p&gt;</comment>
                    </comments>
                    <attachments>
                    </attachments>
                <subtasks>
                    </subtasks>
                <customfields>
                                                                                                                                                                                            <customfield id="customfield_10890" key="com.atlassian.jira.plugins.jira-development-integration-plugin:devsummary">
                        <customfieldname>Development</customfieldname>
                        <customfieldvalues>
                            
                        </customfieldvalues>
                    </customfield>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        <customfield id="customfield_10390" key="com.pyxis.greenhopper.jira:gh-lexo-rank">
                        <customfieldname>Rank</customfieldname>
                        <customfieldvalues>
                            <customfieldvalue>1|hzvsbj:</customfieldvalue>

                        </customfieldvalues>
                    </customfield>
                                                                <customfield id="customfield_10090" key="com.pyxis.greenhopper.jira:gh-global-rank">
                        <customfieldname>Rank (Obsolete)</customfieldname>
                        <customfieldvalues>
                            <customfieldvalue>8487</customfieldvalue>
                        </customfieldvalues>
                    </customfield>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                </customfields>
    </item>
</channel>
</rss>