[Mono-bugs] [Bug 58332][Cri] Changed - spec file to rebuild rpms fails on Fedora FC1

[bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.ximian.com]

Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the
URL shown below and enter your comments there.

Changed by david.brownlee@comcast.net.

http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=58332

--- shadow/58332	2004-05-12 16:03:03.000000000 -0400
+++ shadow/58332.tmp.5270	2004-05-27 23:02:01.000000000 -0400
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
 Bug#: 58332
 Product: Mono: Runtime
 Version: unspecified
 OS: unknown
 OS Details: Fedora FC1 with updates as of 5/11
-Status: NEEDINFO   
+Status: REOPENED   
 Resolution: 
 Severity: Unknown
 Priority: Critical
 Component: misc
 AssignedTo: duncan@ximian.com                            
 ReportedBy: david.brownlee@comcast.net               
@@ -222,6 +222,27 @@
 Mono.Security.Win32 are part of the tarball, but they do not need to
 be released. That's why there are not in the original SPEC file I
 published.
 
 I'll look into gzipping our man pages in the next revision of our
 packages.
+
+------- Additional Comments From david.brownlee@comcast.net  2004-05-27 23:02 -------
+a) They install fine without conflicts but produce a runtime error 
+(see b) 
+ 
+b) 2.4.22-1.2188.nptl.  That kernel was current (FC1 + updates) at 
+the time I reported the bug. 
+ 
+> The files you added, cilc, monosn, the various .la files and 
+> Mono.Security.Win32 are part of the tarball, but they do not need  
+> to be released. That's why there are not in the original SPEC file  
+> I published. 
+ 
+I added the files to the spec file so that rpmbuild would create the 
+package file instead of complaining about files installed but not in 
+the spec file.  If they don't need to be included, then the spec 
+file's install section could be changed to make sure they don't get 
+copied into the buildroot. 
+ 
+Thanks for looking at these issues.  I'm completely new to C#/.Net 
+but I'm looking forward to using mono as a learning tool.