[users] Dropbox RPM 32bit binaries

[Mauriat Miranda]

Hi,

I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
Then I noticed none existed for i386:
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
Shows:
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory

It's missing this file:
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.

However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.

I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

[Mauriat Miranda]

Hi,

I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
Then I noticed none existed for i386:
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
Shows:
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory

It's missing this file:
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.

However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.

I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

[Mauriat Miranda]

Hi,

I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
Then I noticed none existed for i386:
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
Shows:
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory

It's missing this file:
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.

However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.

I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

[Mauriat Miranda]

Hi,

I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
Then I noticed none existed for i386:
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
Shows:
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory

It's missing this file:
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.

However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.

I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

[Mauriat Miranda]

Hi,

I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
Then I noticed none existed for i386:
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
Shows:
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory

It's missing this file:
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.

However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.

I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

[Dave Miller]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
Hi,
I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.
However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.
I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

This reply is about a month late, but since it doesn't look like anyone
answered it yet...

You can have a Source0: and Source1: line instead of just Source:

You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

Most of what you need to know can be found at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Dave Miller
You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

What Steve currently has right now is:

%ifarch i386
%define dropbox_arch x86
%else
%define dropbox_arch x86_64
%endif
Source: http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.%{dropbox_arch}-%{version}.tar.gz

Doesn't it work?

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Well clearly not since there are no i386 packages available in the repository.

Ah, sorry, I see the problem.

Could you please try to rebuild the SPEC from the SVN?

http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/dropbox/dropbox.spec

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Please CC to the list.

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also

wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.

Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi!
Please CC to the list.

Sorry, gmail issue

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
?SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
?the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also
wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.
Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Good to know.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

Thanks. I dropped in the tarball into sources and both the src and
binary RPMs built properly with the -ba.

My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Thanks for all the help.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs? The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Good point. For us it probably wouldn't matter, SRPM will just contain
the source of what was last build, but for people trying to rebuilt the
SRPM it will break things.

Probably we should go for Dave's trick with Source0 and Source1 and
juggle the arch in %prep for the SRPM to contain both.

Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

[Steve Huff]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

heh, there are bigger problems than this with the dropbox package, like the fact that the dropbox server only starts successfully the first time you install it :( dropbox is nice to have, but i've come to the conclusion that until they open *all* the source, packaging it may be more trouble than it's worth (never mind the Python compatibility issues).

-steve

--
If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
http://five.sentenc.es

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100903/12b496e5/attachment.bin

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

:-)

[Steve Huff]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

heh, there are bigger problems than this with the dropbox package, like the fact that the dropbox server only starts successfully the first time you install it :( dropbox is nice to have, but i've come to the conclusion that until they open *all* the source, packaging it may be more trouble than it's worth (never mind the Python compatibility issues).

-steve

--
If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
http://five.sentenc.es

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100903/12b496e5/attachment-0001.bin

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

:-)

[Steve Huff]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

heh, there are bigger problems than this with the dropbox package, like the fact that the dropbox server only starts successfully the first time you install it :( dropbox is nice to have, but i've come to the conclusion that until they open *all* the source, packaging it may be more trouble than it's worth (never mind the Python compatibility issues).

-steve

--
If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
http://five.sentenc.es

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100903/12b496e5/attachment-0002.bin

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

:-)

[Steve Huff]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

heh, there are bigger problems than this with the dropbox package, like the fact that the dropbox server only starts successfully the first time you install it :( dropbox is nice to have, but i've come to the conclusion that until they open *all* the source, packaging it may be more trouble than it's worth (never mind the Python compatibility issues).

-steve

--
If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
http://five.sentenc.es

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100903/12b496e5/attachment-0003.bin

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

:-)

[Steve Huff]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

heh, there are bigger problems than this with the dropbox package, like the fact that the dropbox server only starts successfully the first time you install it :( dropbox is nice to have, but i've come to the conclusion that until they open *all* the source, packaging it may be more trouble than it's worth (never mind the Python compatibility issues).

-steve

--
If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction. - Fabian, Twelfth Night, III,v
http://five.sentenc.es

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.repoforge.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100903/12b496e5/attachment.sig>

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

:-)

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

What the *.src.rpm conatins isn't the important issue. Put
anything you wish into a *.src.rpm that is convenient.

But binary *.rpm's should ALWAYS contain only elf32/elf64.

All sorts of "multilib" stuff will break if/when that rule is violated.

hth

73 de Jeff

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs? The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Good point. For us it probably wouldn't matter, SRPM will just contain
the source of what was last build, but for people trying to rebuilt the
SRPM it will break things.

Probably we should go for Dave's trick with Source0 and Source1 and
juggle the arch in %prep for the SRPM to contain both.

Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

What the *.src.rpm conatins isn't the important issue. Put
anything you wish into a *.src.rpm that is convenient.

But binary *.rpm's should ALWAYS contain only elf32/elf64.

All sorts of "multilib" stuff will break if/when that rule is violated.

hth

73 de Jeff

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs? The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Good point. For us it probably wouldn't matter, SRPM will just contain
the source of what was last build, but for people trying to rebuilt the
SRPM it will break things.

Probably we should go for Dave's trick with Source0 and Source1 and
juggle the arch in %prep for the SRPM to contain both.

Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

What the *.src.rpm conatins isn't the important issue. Put
anything you wish into a *.src.rpm that is convenient.

But binary *.rpm's should ALWAYS contain only elf32/elf64.

All sorts of "multilib" stuff will break if/when that rule is violated.

hth

73 de Jeff

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs? The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Good point. For us it probably wouldn't matter, SRPM will just contain
the source of what was last build, but for people trying to rebuilt the
SRPM it will break things.

Probably we should go for Dave's trick with Source0 and Source1 and
juggle the arch in %prep for the SRPM to contain both.

Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

What the *.src.rpm conatins isn't the important issue. Put
anything you wish into a *.src.rpm that is convenient.

But binary *.rpm's should ALWAYS contain only elf32/elf64.

All sorts of "multilib" stuff will break if/when that rule is violated.

hth

73 de Jeff

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs? The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Good point. For us it probably wouldn't matter, SRPM will just contain
the source of what was last build, but for people trying to rebuilt the
SRPM it will break things.

Probably we should go for Dave's trick with Source0 and Source1 and
juggle the arch in %prep for the SRPM to contain both.

Steve, are you willing to take care of this?

P.S. Glad you got it working anyway. It's kind of funny by the way, when
I was just starting with Linux your Fedora tutorials helped a big
deal... Now I happen to meet the author on a packaging mailing list :-)

[Jeff Johnson]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

What the *.src.rpm conatins isn't the important issue. Put
anything you wish into a *.src.rpm that is convenient.

But binary *.rpm's should ALWAYS contain only elf32/elf64.

All sorts of "multilib" stuff will break if/when that rule is violated.

hth

73 de Jeff

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi!
Please CC to the list.

Sorry, gmail issue

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
?SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
?the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also
wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.
Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Good to know.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

Thanks. I dropped in the tarball into sources and both the src and
binary RPMs built properly with the -ba.

My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Thanks for all the help.

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi!
Please CC to the list.

Sorry, gmail issue

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
?SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
?the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also
wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.
Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Good to know.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

Thanks. I dropped in the tarball into sources and both the src and
binary RPMs built properly with the -ba.

My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Thanks for all the help.

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi!
Please CC to the list.

Sorry, gmail issue

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
?SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
?the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also
wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.
Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Good to know.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

Thanks. I dropped in the tarball into sources and both the src and
binary RPMs built properly with the -ba.

My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Thanks for all the help.

[Mauriat Miranda]

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Hi!
Please CC to the list.

Sorry, gmail issue

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
?SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
?the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also
wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.
Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Good to know.

Post by Yury V. Zaytsev
Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

Thanks. I dropped in the tarball into sources and both the src and
binary RPMs built properly with the -ba.

My only question is this: should the SRC.RPM contain both 32bit and
64bit tarballs?
The SRC.RPM I have now, only contains the 32bit.

Thanks for all the help.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Please CC to the list.

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also

wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.

Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Please CC to the list.

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also

wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.

Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Please CC to the list.

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also

wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.

Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Hi!

Please CC to the list.

I downloaded the current SRC.RPM from the repo, then I replaced the
SPEC file from svn. I ran 'rpmbuild -ba' on the spec file and it gives
the same error.

Yes, this is wrong. You should also

wget http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz

in the sources directory and only then do rpmbuild -ba.

Our buildsystem expands the SPEC and then downloads all the sources
automatically, however raw rpmbuild is not able to do so even after the
SPEC was corrected.

Unless I did another mistake it should work then.

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Well clearly not since there are no i386 packages available in the repository.

Ah, sorry, I see the problem.

Could you please try to rebuild the SPEC from the SVN?

http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/dropbox/dropbox.spec

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Well clearly not since there are no i386 packages available in the repository.

Ah, sorry, I see the problem.

Could you please try to rebuild the SPEC from the SVN?

http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/dropbox/dropbox.spec

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Well clearly not since there are no i386 packages available in the repository.

Ah, sorry, I see the problem.

Could you please try to rebuild the SPEC from the SVN?

http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/dropbox/dropbox.spec

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Well clearly not since there are no i386 packages available in the repository.

Ah, sorry, I see the problem.

Could you please try to rebuild the SPEC from the SVN?

http://svn.rpmforge.net/svn/trunk/rpms/dropbox/dropbox.spec

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Dave Miller
You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

What Steve currently has right now is:

%ifarch i386
%define dropbox_arch x86
%else
%define dropbox_arch x86_64
%endif
Source: http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.%{dropbox_arch}-%{version}.tar.gz

Doesn't it work?

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Dave Miller
You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

What Steve currently has right now is:

%ifarch i386
%define dropbox_arch x86
%else
%define dropbox_arch x86_64
%endif
Source: http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.%{dropbox_arch}-%{version}.tar.gz

Doesn't it work?

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Dave Miller
You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

What Steve currently has right now is:

%ifarch i386
%define dropbox_arch x86
%else
%define dropbox_arch x86_64
%endif
Source: http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.%{dropbox_arch}-%{version}.tar.gz

Doesn't it work?

[Yury V. Zaytsev]

Post by Dave Miller
You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

What Steve currently has right now is:

%ifarch i386
%define dropbox_arch x86
%else
%define dropbox_arch x86_64
%endif
Source: http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.%{dropbox_arch}-%{version}.tar.gz

Doesn't it work?

[Dave Miller]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
Hi,
I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.
However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.
I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

This reply is about a month late, but since it doesn't look like anyone
answered it yet...

You can have a Source0: and Source1: line instead of just Source:

You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

Most of what you need to know can be found at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package

[Dave Miller]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
Hi,
I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.
However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.
I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

This reply is about a month late, but since it doesn't look like anyone
answered it yet...

You can have a Source0: and Source1: line instead of just Source:

You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

Most of what you need to know can be found at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package

[Dave Miller]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
Hi,
I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.
However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.
I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

This reply is about a month late, but since it doesn't look like anyone
answered it yet...

You can have a Source0: and Source1: line instead of just Source:

You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

Most of what you need to know can be found at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package

[Dave Miller]

Post by Mauriat Miranda
Hi,
I was trying to do install dropbox via yum on my 32bit CentOS 5, but
it couldn't find the package.
# yum install dropbox --enablerepo=rpmforge
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/
The error log from
http://packages.sw.be/dropbox/_buildlogs/dropbox-0.7.110-2.el5.rf.i386.ko.log.gz
error: File /dar/rpms/dropbox/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz: No such
file or directory
http://dl-web.dropbox.com/u/17/dropbox-lnx.x86-0.7.110.tar.gz
So I downloaded the src RPM and found it to contain only the 64bit
tarball. I added the 32bit tarball and rebuilt it. That created the
RPM fine for me.
However the new src RPM I created only contains the 32bit tarball.
I'm not a pro at packaging, so how does one create the .SPEC file to
contain both? Or is that not the right approach?

This reply is about a month late, but since it doesn't look like anyone
answered it yet...

You can have a Source0: and Source1: line instead of just Source:

You'll need to put in an if block in %prep to check the arch and pass
the appropriate one to %setup as an argument.

Most of what you need to know can be found at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package