[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: libogg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226035
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-11-14 10:30 EST ---
To all interested reviewers, I've become a libogg co-maitainer recently and
I would like to push libogg through its merge review.
(In reply to comment #1)
Must Fix:
* The devel package require should be:
Requires: libogg = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
Already fixed in current rawhide version.
* Is the static lib necessary?
Already removed in the current rawhide version.
Minor:
* Doesn't use preferred buildroot:
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
* Drop the '.' from the summary to quite rpmlint.
* To clean out the install clean section, you should probably use 'rm -rf
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT' for consistancy
All 3 already fixed in the current rawhide version.
* Does this package build using 'make %{_smp_mflags}'?
Just added it to CVS, should show up in rawhide soon.
(In reply to comment #8)
It's pretty much the same issue as pkgconfig files; you can't own the
directory
they go in, so you must have a dependency on the package that does.
Requires: automake already present in current rawhide -devel package
---
So all is fixed now, please review and tell me what needs fixing.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: libogg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226035
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-11-14 10:40 EST ---
From rpmlint:
libogg.src:90: W: macro-in-%changelog doc
libogg.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 1)
The only other thing that I see is that you could macro %{name} and %{version}
into the Source tag.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-11-14 16:12 EST --- This is approved, thanks for the hard work! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-17 01:13 EST --- libogg-devel-1.1.3-4.fc8 requires automake -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag|fedora-review- |fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-08 09:34 EST --- * Thu Feb 8 2007 Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2:1.1.3-3 - Package review cleanups - Don't ship a static library -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-08 10:20 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) I think the ruling is still out on forcing everybody who installs an automake macro to require automake. There is no need to require automake, it is also possible to own /usr/share/aclocal/ I personally would let that choice to the packager. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-08 10:23 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #3) I think the ruling is still out on forcing everybody who installs an automake macro to require automake. There is no need to require automake, it is also possible to own /usr/share/aclocal/ I personally would let that choice to the packager. There is no choice but to require automake. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-08 10:36 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) There is no choice but to require automake. Why? It may be useful, in that people wanting to use the macro in their project don't have to install automake by hand, but automake is not necessarily needed when doing development with a library. automake brings in perl, it is a big dependency. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libogg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-08 14:51 EST --- It's pretty much the same issue as pkgconfig files; you can't own the directory they go in, so you must have a dependency on the package that does. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: libogg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review-
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-03 13:42 EST ---
Good:
* Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines
* Group Tag is from the official list
* All paths begin with macros
* All necessary BuildRequires listed.
* Package builds in Mock.
Must Fix:
* The devel package require should be:
Requires: libogg = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
* Is the static lib necessary? If so, it should be split out into a
sub-package. Refer to:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-2302ec1e1f44202c9cc4bcce24cb711266557ad7
Minor:
* Doesn't use preferred buildroot:
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
* Drop the '.' from the summary to quite rpmlint.
* To clean out the install clean section, you should probably use 'rm -rf
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT' for consistancy
* Does this package build using 'make %{_smp_mflags}'?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226035] Merge Review: libogg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: libogg
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226035
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED],
||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-03 17:30 EST ---
Upstream tar file name is incorrect. Should be:
http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/ogg/libogg-${version}.tar.gz
libogg-devel needs Requires: automake due to installing
/usr/share/aclocal/ogg.m4
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
