Change kernel-mft rpm name to mft_kernel

[binujp]

Merge Checklist

All boxes should be checked before merging the PR (just tick any boxes which don't apply to this PR)

• The toolchain has been rebuilt successfully (or no changes were made to it)
• The toolchain/worker package manifests are up-to-date
• Any updated packages successfully build (or no packages were changed)
• Packages depending on static components modified in this PR (Golang, *-static subpackages, etc.) have had their Release tag incremented.
• Package tests (%check section) have been verified with RUN_CHECK=y for existing SPEC files, or added to new SPEC files
• All package sources are available
• cgmanifest files are up-to-date and sorted (./cgmanifest.json, ./toolkit/scripts/toolchain/cgmanifest.json, .github/workflows/cgmanifest.json)
• LICENSE-MAP files are up-to-date (./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/data/licenses.json, ./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/LICENSES-MAP.md, ./LICENSES-AND-NOTICES/SPECS/LICENSE-EXCEPTIONS.PHOTON)
• All source files have up-to-date hashes in the *.signatures.json files
• sudo make go-tidy-all and sudo make go-test-coverage pass
• Documentation has been updated to match any changes to the build system
• Ready to merge

---

Summary

What does the PR accomplish, why was it needed?

To comply AZL spec standard mandates renaming kernel-mft*.rpm to mft_kernel rpm and add a provides to satisfy dependencies to the old name.

Change Log

• Change
• Change
• Change

Does this affect the toolchain?

YES/NO
NO

Associated issues

• #xxxx

Links to CVEs

• https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-YYYY-XXXX

Test Methodology

• Pipeline build id: xxxx

[PawelWMS]

Please always add version information for Provides, so that each new version provides its own. Otherwise, if you try to install a specific version of kernel-mft, the package manager may not be able to find it.

Suggested change

	Provides: kernel-mft
	Provides: kernel-mft = %{version}-%{release}

[binujp]

Yes, will add that.

[PawelWMS]

The comment is not entirely correct. It's a match between the spec file name and the Name tag is what we're trying to follow. To give more context, the Name tag defines the name of the default subpackage but not all specs produce their default subpackages.

If you wish to keep a comment for future reference, this should be a bit more accurate:

Suggested change

	# Best practice for specs mandate package name and rpm name must
	# match. Default mft_kernel spec set rpm name as kernel-mft. To
	# comply, we set Name as mft_kernel but add a Provides for kernel-mft.
	# Azure Linux attempts to match the spec file name and the "Name" tag.
	# Upstream's mft_kernel spec set rpm name as kernel-mft. To
	# comply, we set "Name" as mft_kernel but add a "Provides" for kernel-mft.

[PawelWMS]

Btw. you're also free to ignore the default package completely and just create one that's called kernel-mft, if that's preferable over a Provides.

[binujp]

Btw. you're also free to ignore the default package completely and just create one that's called kernel-mft, if that's preferable over a Provides.

Sorry, I am not sure I understood this. Did you mean keep everything the same as earlier and add a provides mft_kernel to satisfy dependency graphing tools? I will take the rephrased comment verbatim or rephrase depending on what you meant here.