https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839395

--- Comment #16 from Brenton Leanhardt <[email protected]> ---
Regarding %patch1, that was another mistake.  I had incorrectly ported a change
that was recommended in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby.  There
the following is used in prep:

gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec

I believe that command creates whitespace differences that causes gemspec
patches to fail (if they were was created against the original source).  That
meant if I needed to patch the gemspec I had to patch it after that command.

If that line isn't absolutely necessary I would like to avoid it. Currently I
believe (fixed) prep section is much more readable:

gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
%setup -q -D -T -n  %{gem_name}-%{version}
%patch0 -p1
%patch1 -p1

Right now there are unfortunately no real unit tests for this package (even
though they exist in test/unit).  They are all integration style tests that
have external dependencies.

I would like to create -doc subpackages for all OpenShift libraries once the
dust settles a little and the packagers involved have time to standardize on
decisions like this.

Here are the updated artifacts:

* Fri Aug 17 2012 Brenton Leanhardt <[email protected]> - 0.14.15-7
- Fixed prep and build sections
- Removed ruby-devel BuildRequire
- Removed useless CONFIGURE_ARGS variable
- Proper usage of gem_libdir and gem_instdir in install section
- Correctly incorrect usage of doc directive and fixed incorrect gem_libdir
  exclusion

SRPM:
http://brenton.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/rubygem-openshift-origin-controller/201208170939/rubygem-openshift-origin-controller-0.14.15-7.fc18.src.rpm

Spec:
http://brenton.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/rubygem-openshift-origin-controller/201208170939/rubygem-openshift-origin-controller.spec

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to