vfat filesystem "fix" breaks rpm kernel install on ia64

[Doug Chapman]

On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 11:36 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 10:16:00AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
>  > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:00:32PM -0500, Doug Chapman wrote:
>  > > Actually I came up with what I think is a cleaner fix for this.  Since
>  > > the default file permission on files on vfat are 755 anyway if the
>  > > kernel is mode 755 rpm doesn't complain.
>  > > 
>  > > Anybody have thoughts on this specfile change?  I build this as a
>  > > scratch build on our ia64 koji server and it installs cleanly.
>  > > 
>  > > - Doug
>  > > 
>  > > *** kernel.spec.bad	2008-02-28 19:58:55.000000000 -0500
>  > > --- kernel.spec	2008-02-28 21:39:57.000000000 -0500
>  > > *************** BuildKernel() {
>  > > *** 1301,1306 ****
>  > > --- 1301,1310 ----
>  > >       $CopyKernel $KernelImage \
>  > >       		$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{image_install_path}/$InstallName-$KernelVer
>  > >   
>  > > + %ifarch ia64
>  > > +     chmod 755 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{image_install_path}/$InstallName-$KernelVer
>  > > + %endif
>  > > + 
>  > >       mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/modules/$KernelVer
>  > >       make -s ARCH=$Arch INSTALL_MOD_PATH=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT modules_install KERNELRELEASE=$KernelVer
>  > >   %ifarch %{vdso_arches}
>  > 
>  > 
>  > There are systems with EFI32 and EFI64 out there, that aren't ia64,
>  > but that will likewise be dropping files into a vfat file system.
> 
> I don't see any problem in unconditionally doing the chmod.  Anyone else?
>

I can't actually think of any reason this would break on other
platforms.  I added the %ifarch ia64 "just in case" because I really
don't want to be "that ia64 guy who breaks everyone else's stuff".

- Doug