postfix .src.rpm fails to build on fc6

[Asrai khn]

Hi am trying to build postfix-2.3.3-2.src.rpm with Mysql support on FC6 but
each time it fails and during build process it gives millions of lines
scrolling ...

(..)
postsuper.c:112:1: warning: "/*" within comment
postsuper.c:113:1: warning: "/*" within comment
postsuper.c:114:1: warning: "/*" within comment
postsuper.c:115:1: warning: "/*" within comment
postsuper.c:116:1: warning: "/*" within comment
postsuper.c:117:1: warning: "/*" within comment
(..)

And in end it exit with error ..

+ exit 1
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.651 (%install)


RPM build errors:
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.651 (%install)

I have tried to build it on two different hosts but faced with same problem.

Any idea please ?

Thanks.

[Phil Meyer]

Asrai khn wrote:
>  Hi am trying to build postfix-2.3.3-2.src.rpm with Mysql support on 
>  FC6 but each time it fails and during build process it gives millions 
>  of lines scrolling ...
>
>  (..)
>  postsuper.c:112:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:113:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:114:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:115:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:116:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:117:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  (..)
>
>  And in end it exit with error ..
>
>  + exit 1
>  error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.651 (%install)
>
>
>  RPM build errors:
>      Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.651 (%install)
>
>  I have tried to build it on two different hosts but faced with same 
>  problem.
>
>  Any idea please ?
>
>  Thanks.  
Are you building in a private rpmbuild, or as root?

It may be worth your while to install rpmdevtools.

# yum install rpmdevtools

Then as yourself, run:

$ rpmdev-setuptree
$ rpm -ihv postfix...src.rpm
$ cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS
$ vi postfix.spec -- to your liking
$ rpmbuild -ba postfix.spec

That will generate a rpm that you can install.  But the big difference 
is that doing it this way will insure you don't step on system stuff and 
that it builds in a private buildroot.

If it still fails, you know you haven't hurt anything, and simply do it 
again and run the oputput to a file:

$ rpmbuild -ba postfix.spec > /tmp/r.out 2>&1

Now examine the file (long) for errors.  Work up from the bottom.

Fix as possible, then retry.  But generally package build errors are 
likely to fall into a couple of catagories:

1. missing -devel packages
2. permissions (selinux can cause packages to fail build if root tries 
to step on existing files).  Fixed by running rpmbuild as yourself.

Good Luck!

[Michael Fleming]

On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 01:01 +0500, Asrai khn wrote:
>  Hi am trying to build postfix-2.3.3-2.src.rpm with Mysql support on
>  FC6 but each time it fails and during build process it gives millions
>  of lines scrolling ...
>  
>  (..)
>  postsuper.c:112:1: warning: "/*" within comment 
>  postsuper.c:113:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:114:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:115:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  postsuper.c:116:1: warning: "/*" within comment 
>  postsuper.c:117:1: warning: "/*" within comment
>  (..)
>   
These are just warnings and are harmless - it's just the way Wietse
(Postfix's author) uses comments in the code.

>  And in end it exit with error ..
>  
>  + exit 1
>  error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.651 (%install)
>  
>  
>  RPM build errors:
>      Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.651 (%install)
>  
>  I have tried to build it on two different hosts but faced with same
>  problem.
>  
>  Any idea please ?
>   
The problem isn't with Postfix itself, just part of the specfile that
uses "ed" to manipulate the "postfix-files" file (which contains the
file list + ownership and permissions for Postfix core files, used in
turn by the "postfix check" command) to suit Fedora's alternatives
setup. It seems the version of ed supplied in FC6 updates ( 0.3, not the
original ed 0.2 package in core)

I worked around this by forcing "ed = 0.2" in the spec file's
BuildRequires line and rebuilt. Someone with better knowledge of ed's
internals or usage may have a better fix, but if you're reading this
message it works ;-)

>  Thanks.  
No problem :-)

Michael.

-- 
Michael Fleming <mfleming(a)enlartenment.com&gt; in Brisbane, Australia
"Be master of your mind, not mastered by mind"

[Asrai khn]

On 3/2/07, Michael Fleming <mfleming(a)enlartenment.com&gt; wrote:
>  I worked around this by forcing "ed = 0.2" in the spec file's
>  BuildRequires line and rebuilt. Someone with better knowledge of ed's
>  internals or usage may have a better fix, but if you're reading this
>  message it works ;-) 


Hi, Michael

I have changed BuildRequries line to ..

BuildRequires: gawk, perl, sed, ed = 0.2, db4-devel, pkgconfig, zlib-devel

Now its giving me ..

error: Failed build dependencies:
        ed = 0.2 is needed by postfix-2.3.3-2.i386

I have ed 0.3 installed, now i have to remove it and install the 0.2 version
of ed from core?

Thanks. Askar

[Asrai khn]

On 3/2/07, Michael Fleming <mfleming(a)enlartenment.com&gt; wrote:
>  I worked around this by forcing "ed = 0.2" in the spec file's
>  BuildRequires line and rebuilt. Someone with better knowledge of ed's
>  internals or usage may have a better fix, but if you're reading this
>  message it works ;-) 


After removing ed 0.3 and installing ed-0.2 postfix build successfully.

I very appreciate your help :)

Thanks. Askar

[Asrai khn]

On 3/2/07, Michael Fleming <mfleming(a)enlartenment.com&gt; wrote:
>  Someone with better knowledge of ed's internals or usage may have a better
>  fix 


I am wondering anyone from  fedora-dev  team shied some light on this ed
issue :) ?

Regards. Askar

[Karsten Hopp]

Asrai khn schrieb:
>  
>  
>  On 3/2/07, *Michael Fleming* <mfleming(a)enlartenment.com 
>  <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  
>      Someone with better knowledge of ed's internals or usage may have a
>      better fix
>  
>  
>  
>  I am wondering anyone from  fedora-dev  team shied some light on this ed 
>  issue :) ?
>  
>  Regards. Askar
>   
Reported upstream as a regression, no answer yet.



--
  Karsten Hopp        | Mail: karsten(a)redhat.de
  Red Hat Deutschland | Tel: [phone]
  Hauptstaetterstr.58 | Fax: [phone]
  D-70178 Stuttgart   | http://www.redhat.de

[Karsten Hopp]

Karsten Hopp schrieb:
>  Asrai khn schrieb:
> >
> >
> > On 3/2/07, *Michael Fleming* <mfleming(a)enlartenment.com 
> > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> >
> >     Someone with better knowledge of ed's internals or usage may have a
> >     better fix
> >
> >
> >
> > I am wondering anyone from  fedora-dev  team shied some light on this 
> > ed issue :) ?
> >
> > Regards. Askar
> >
>  
>  Reported upstream as a regression, no answer yet.
>  
>   
Update:

The current upstream maintainer claims that '%' is no longer a valid
range specification in ed-0.3/0.4 and that 1,$ should be used instead.
I'm trying to convince him that breaking existing scripts isn't
such a good idea.

    Karsten

--
  Karsten Hopp        | Mail: karsten(a)redhat.de
  Red Hat Deutschland | Tel: [phone]
  Hauptstaetterstr.58 | Fax: [phone]
  D-70178 Stuttgart   | http://www.redhat.de

[Asrai khn]

On 3/5/07, Karsten Hopp <karsten(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Update:
>
>  The current upstream maintainer claims that '%' is no longer a valid
>  range specification in ed-0.3/0.4 and that 1,$ should be used instead.
>  I'm trying to convince him that breaking existing scripts isn't
>  such a good idea. 

Hi Karsten


I greatly appreicate your efforts, if they do not agree then please let me
know what would be the fix, atm ihave solved my problem by removing ed
0.3and installed
0.2 and build postfix rpm and then updated ed.


Thanks and regards. Askar