[Bug 329291] Review Request: debootstrap - Bootstrap a basic Debian GNU/Linux system

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Nov 15 21:57:27 UTC 2007


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: debootstrap - Bootstrap a basic Debian GNU/Linux system
Alias: debootstrap-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=329291





------- Additional Comments From lkundrak at redhat.com  2007-11-15 16:57 EST -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> Isn't it a typo in 
> debootstrap-1.0.3-devices.patch
> should be dev instead of dir? That's quite strange that it
> worked... Maybe the devices may be created on the fly anyway?

Right, I fixed the dir to dev.

> Also there is a path in the debootstrap script, 
>     DEBOOTSTRAP_DIR=/usr/lib/debootstrap
> In my spec I did:
> sed -i.datadir -e
> 's:DEBOOTSTRAP_DIR=/usr/lib/debootstrap:DEBOOTSTRAP_DIR=%{_datadir}/%{name}/:'
> debootstrap

Right, I have forgotten an existing /usr/lib/debootstrap in place from some
previous attempt. This might have been the reason why did the install work even
with 'dir' instead of 'dev'

> rpmlint says:
> debootstrap.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 13)
> debootstrap.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/man/man8/debootstrap.8.gz

Attempted to fix both. rpmlint is quiet now.

And soo, here are the updated packages:

SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/lkundrak/SPECS/debootstrap.spec
SRPM:
http://people.redhat.com/lkundrak/mock-results/debootstrap-1.0.3-2.fc9.noarch/debootstrap-1.0.3-2.fc9.noarch.rpm
mock: http://people.redhat.com/lkundrak/mock-results/debootstrap-1.0.3-2.fc9.noarch/

Thanks for the reminder, Parag, and thanks for the patience Patrice. I'm
horribly sorry for the delay.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.




More information about the package-review mailing list