Demo Discussion
Forum Config Examples Contributions Vulnerabilities
  Discussion forum about ELOG  Not logged in ELOG logo
icon1.gif   bug in elog.spec, posted by Janusz Szuba on Mon Jul 6 19:09:48 2020 
    icon2.gif   Re: bug in elog.spec, posted by Laurent Jean-Rigaud on Mon Jul 6 20:19:21 2020 elog.specelog-3.1.4-2.CNES.el6.src.rpm
       icon2.gif   Re: bug in elog.spec, posted by Janusz Szuba on Tue Jul 7 11:22:45 2020 
Message ID: 69169     Entry time: Tue Jul 7 11:22:45 2020     In reply to: 69168
Icon: Reply  Author: Janusz Szuba  Author Email: 
Category: Bug report  OS: Linux  ELOG Version: 3.1.4 
Subject: Re: bug in elog.spec 

Thanks for the answer, I will try with your specfile



Laurent Jean-Rigaud wrote:


You rights, CFLAGS should not be in specfile to take care of distrib env.

Btw, I sent in the past an update for build process of Stefan delivery to generate src.rpm file copatible to tarball version. I think Stefan did not have time yet to test and to check.

With the enclosed SPEC file, you can build ELOG with options at rpmbulld command w/o modifying sources. For exemple,

rpm -i elog-.....src.rpm

rpmbuild -bb --with ssl --with pam --with ldap --with krb5 ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/elog.spec


I enclosed also the SRPMS i used for my projects. Be careful, It's maybe not uptodate of last GIT version or PSI releases... but you can test it on your RPM distrib. It should be nice to hare your feedback.




Janusz Szuba wrote:


in commit 1812e7c, specifying CFLAGS to make command in elog.spec, renders all other settings in Makefile void. That is, if I want to include any of KRB5, LDAP, PAM support, and change makefile accordingly, then when producing rpm they are not taken into account. Anyway, CFLAGS in Makefile are already set to the same defaults, so why it is redefined in spec file?





ELOG V3.1.4-80633ba