https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rjones(a)redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com&gt; --- There seems to be a certain amount of copy and paste in the spec file which is not necessary as far as I can see. These entire sections seem to be unnecessary and should be deleted: # Prevent RPM from stripping the binaries & debuginfo. # # NB: Only required because this package uses the obsolete -custom # parameter and builds a bytecode 'ocamlrpcgen'. I tried to fix the # build to make a native code 'ocamlrpcgen' but the build system got # the better of me. %global debug_package %{nil} %global __strip /bin/true #%global __ocaml_requires_opts -i Asttypes -i Outcometree -i Parsetree %global __ocaml_requires_opts -c -f '%{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ocamlrun %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ocamlobjinfo' %global __ocaml_provides_opts -f '%{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ocamlrun %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ocamlobjinfo' I also think the commented-out lines in the %files sections should be deleted if they are not needed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Tomas Heinrich <theinric(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |theinric(a)redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Tomas Heinrich <theinric(a)redhat.com&gt; --- rpmlint: (rpmlint-1.6-2.fc22.noarch) Should this package actually be noarch? Can you provide a rationale why, either way? Can't really say why this one is happening. Looks benign, but I guess it won't hurt to add an explicit --libdir=... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 --- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones(a)redhat.com&gt; --- (In reply to Tomas Heinrich from comment #3) In this very specific instance (but not in OCaml libraries in general) the ocaml-config-file package contains only bytecode. However we have found in the past that bytecode isn't completely non-arch-specific, so I'd be very dubious about making the subpackage noarch. It would require you to build on arm/x86/x86-64 and then manually compare the files to check there are really no differences. The -devel subpackage has a *.cmxs file which is really a shared library of native code, so that's certainly not noarch. I would not advise making either subpackage noarch. Have you got the filelist handy? Since OCaml 4, the compiler supports fairly good DWARF generation, but our debuginfo tooling doesn't think *.ml is a source file. Also you may have to change the invocation of ocamlc & ocamlopt to pass -g everywhere. Typically upstream OCaml packages don't do this consistently. If you're not passing -g to everything, then you'll end up with empty/broken debuginfo which might be what's happening here. It depends if the configure script supplied by upstream is a real autotools configure, or something else. It might choke on --libdir. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 --- Comment #6 from Tomas Heinrich <theinric(a)redhat.com&gt; --- (In reply to Richard W.M. Jones from comment #4) Thanks for the comments. OK, just want to have this documented here. $ rpm -qlp rpms/x86_64/ocaml-config-file-debuginfo-1.2-2.fc22.x86_64.rpm /usr/lib/debug /usr/lib/debug/.build-id /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/49 /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/49/e2bfe8f16e0685485f0c8fa717cc2a8b61feb1 /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/49/e2bfe8f16e0685485f0c8fa717cc2a8b61feb1.debug /usr/lib/debug/usr /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64 /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/ocaml /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/ocaml/config-file /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/ocaml/config-file/config_file.cmxs.debug $ find build/config-file-1.2/ | sort <...> build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmi build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmo build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmx build/config-file-1.2/config_file.cmxs build/config-file-1.2/config_file.ml build/config-file-1.2/config_file.mli build/config-file-1.2/config_file.o build/config-file-1.2/config_file_parser.ml4 build/config-file-1.2/debugfiles.list build/config-file-1.2/debuglinks.list build/config-file-1.2/debugsources.list build/config-file-1.2/elfbins.list build/config-file-1.2/example.ml <...> Looking at the Makefile, I guess it would have to be patched to pass "-g" everywhere. Checked the configure script and tried a buildrun with the flag, didn't notice any issues. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 --- Comment #8 from Tomas Heinrich <theinric(a)redhat.com&gt; --- One more thing (based on the previous srpm): The datadir (e.g. /usr/lib64/ocaml/config-file) isn't owned by the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Tomas Heinrich <theinric(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Tomas Heinrich <theinric(a)redhat.com&gt; --- A scratch build passed: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9222208 I think the package is good to go. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi(a)redhat.com&gt; --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: ocaml-config-file Short Description: Configuration file management for OCaml Owners: nmav Branches: f21 epel7 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2015-03-13 10:25:49 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- ocaml-config-file-1.2-3.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ocaml-config-file-1.2-3.el7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc22 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc2 | |2 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200384 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc2 |ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc2 |2 |1 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- ocaml-config-file-1.2-4.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component