Re: [Freeipmi-devel] [PATCH 0/9] Unsorted init script tuning

[Al Chu]

Hi Jan,

I noticed this in your 9/9 patch for the freeipmi.spec file:

 %build
 %configure --program-prefix=%{?_program_prefix:%{_program_prefix}} \
-           %{?_enable_debug} --disable-static
-CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" make %{?_smp_mflags}
+           %{?_enable_debug} --disable-static CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS 
-DINT_MAX=65536"
+make %{?_smp_mflags}

I'm a little lost on the need to define INT_MAX to 65536.  Some wierd
corner case I'm not familiar with?

Al

On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 10:23 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
> Hey Jan,
> 
> A thought just came up in regards to your 9/9 patch.
> 
> If we were to consistently prefix "freeipmi-" in front of everything,
> would that also make us LSB compliant?  And perhaps make all parties
> happy?
> 
> Al
> 
> On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 10:01 -0700, Al Chu wrote:
> > Hey Jan,
> > 
> > Thanks for the patches.  Because this is a pretty big change (will be
> > bigger if I use patch 9/9), I'll only apply to the head branch.  I hope
> > to release 0.8.1 beta in the not to distant future.
> > 
> > As a whole, I think all the patches are fine.  I actually don't have an
> > issue for patch 9/9.  However, it conflicts with a previous Redhat
> > patch :-)  I had the naming scheme you propose in the patch (not having
> > freeipmi prefixed in front of init scripts and such).  However, Ben
> > Woodard @ Redhat said I had to put the prefix in front to pass rpmlint
> > which requires the prefix for naming daemons and init scripts.
> > 
> > I've CCed Ben.  Perhaps you guys can debate what takes priority.  I'm
> > fine with either one.  But since two Redhat requests are conflicting,
> > I'm not sure which distro rule wins out :-)
> > 
> > Al
> > 
> > On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 12:45 +0200, Jan Safranek wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > here comes short sequence of various small and stupid fixes in 
> > > bmc-watchdog and
> > > ipmidetectd initscripts. The goal is to make them LSB-compliant, with 
> > > proper
> > > exit codes and actions, which is required by Fedora guidelines.
> > > 
> > > I am maintainer of Fedora packages and I can have these changes there as 
> > > Fedora
> > > patches, but you might find some of them interesting. I intentionally 
> > > made the
> > > patches as small as possible, so you can pick only some of them.
> > > 
> > > Feel free to comment any of the patches, I expect you won't like all of 
> > > them
> > > (especially the last one :).
> > > 
> > > Jan
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Freeipmi-devel mailing list
> > > address@hidden
> > > http://**lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freeipmi-devel
> > > 
-- 
Albert Chu
address@hidden
Computer Scientist
High Performance Systems Division
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory