[Bug 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 21:57 EST --- Ok hopefully this fixes all 'fixable' rpmlint errors. Bizarrely FC6/X86_64 also needed LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool on the install line which took a bit to work out. http://dribble.org.uk/reviews/cegui-0.5.0b-3.src.rpm http://dribble.org.uk/reviews/cegui.spec -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-20 22:34 EST --- Looks great now. The only things left from rpmlint are: W: cegui-devel no-documentation E: cegui-devel-doc devel-dependency cegui-devel (which is kind of funny, actually) and all of the unused-direct-shlib-dependency warnings. So I think we're good. APPROVED -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-16 02:17 EST --- OK, now there are far fewer rpmlint complaints. This exposes some things which I perhaps simply didn't notice last time. One trivial thing: W: cegui mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 17) which is no big deal, and then a bunch of the dreaded rpath errors: E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUITGAImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUILibxmlParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUIOpenGLRenderer.so.0.0.1 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUIExpatParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUITinyXMLParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUISILLYImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUIDevILImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUIFalagardWRBase.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUIXercesParser.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUILuaScriptModule.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] According to the package changelog, some work was done to get rid of rpath in the past but I guess it hasn't survived into this rewrite. I tried a few of the usual things to deal with it (--disable-rpath, export LIBTOOL=libtool, libtoolize) but none seemed to make any difference for whatever reason. However, doing make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool and deleting the resulting .a files got things working OK. -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-16 19:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) I perhaps simply didn't notice last time. One trivial thing: W: cegui mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 17) I normally have my editor convert tabs to spaces but this is a silly side effect of me temporarily using a different editor. I'll fix that. which is no big deal, and then a bunch of the dreaded rpath errors: E: cegui binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libCEGUITGAImageCodec.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] Yeah I remember this now from the 0.4 branch. It only effects 64bit and as I don't readily have access to a 64bit machine it can go unnoticed. However, doing make LIBTOOL=/usr/bin/libtool and deleting the resulting .a files got things working OK. Thanks Jason, these issues are trivial to fix so I'll post an updated version shortly. -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-10 18:38 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) Yes, you have to run rpmlint against the installed packages. I install all of the packages I test (into the mock chroot, a convenient hack) and run rpmlint on Yeah I knew you could use rpmlint against installed packages, but it never occurred to me that certain issues can only be picked up this way, I'd just assumed it was for convenience. =) Ok, well I've done a bit of research and this is how things stand. Neither undefined-non-weak-symbol or unused-direct-shlib-dependency are considered blockers. The first warning is caused by a library/exe not being explicitly linked with a library that contains those symbols. Sometimes that's actually desirable eg in the case where you have two libraries which provide a compatible ABI but their functionality may be different you can use either one, but generally it isn't. The peformance penalty for this tends to be a slightly longer startup time as the linker has to locate and satisfy those symbols. The second is caused by a library/exe being linked with a library for which it has no need to be. In other words, it's been linked with a library it doesn't use. I couldn't really find any useful pointers on this one which was quite surprising seeing as how many libraries in Fedora also have this issue. The penalty for this tends to be slightly bigger files and perhaps slightly more memory usage but we're only talking in the region of a few K at most. In order to try and fix this I tried to make use of the linker option --as-needed which I couldn't get to work. Additionally there's a good gentoo article on this issue (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/asneeded.xml#doc_chap2) which explains you can often do more harm than good. Lastly it's not always possible for a build system to determine exactly which libraries it shouldn't link, particularly when querying .pc files etc. So in summary... the weak symbols issue has been fixed. The unused-direct-shlib-dependency hasn't because I don't feel it can fixed in any reasonable manner. Of course I completely happy to be proved wrong. Anyway, here's the latest version: Spec URL: http://dribble.org.uk/reviews/cegui-0.5.0b-2.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://dribble.org.uk/reviews/cegui.spec -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-09 17:31 EST --- I'll take a quick look. I won't do a full review because I trust things like the upstream source and licensing and such are OK. The versioning seems OK; the b is a post-release update, not beta, or at least it seems that way from the upstream web pages. The spec looks OK; if the dependencies of the -devel packages you need are OK, you shouldn't need to actually list a build dependency on pkgconfig but it doesn't hurt. rpmlint spews a massive boatload of warnings. Well over 1300 of them. Most are undefined-non-weak-symbol warnings; some are unused-direct-shlib-dependency. I haven't a clue about how you'd go about fixing them. I'd give my ack to this if I understood the rpmlint warnings or was convinced they're unfixable. They're the only thing I see of issue with this package. -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-09 19:24 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) I'll take a quick look. I won't do a full review because I trust things like the upstream source and licensing and such are OK. No probs :-) The versioning seems OK; the b is a post-release update, not beta, or at least it seems that way from the upstream web pages. Yep, that's pretty much the case. the 'b' release was a quick bug fixed version of 0.5.0. rpmlint spews a massive boatload of warnings. Well over 1300 of them. Most are undefined-non-weak-symbol warnings; some are unused-direct-shlib-dependency. I haven't a clue about how you'd go about fixing them. Hmm, I was confused by this because for me rpmlint only reports two messages, the first one is the usual no documentation found in the devel package, and the second is that the devel-doc package requires the -devel package. Both of wish are not real errors and are ingorable. Can I ask which release/arch you tested it on? I was using FC6/i386. I'd give my ack to this if I understood the rpmlint warnings or was convinced they're unfixable. They're the only thing I see of issue with this package. No problem Jason. Thanks for the headsup, I'll look into those message and see if I can figure out the cause and if anything needs doing. -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-09 19:27 EST --- Ahhh, just realised I do indeed get those errors if I check in the installed package rather than the RPMs themselves. -- 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 242566] Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cegui (0.5.x branch) - Free library providing windowing and widgets for graphics APIs / engines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=242566 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-09 20:03 EST --- Yes, you have to run rpmlint against the installed packages. I install all of the packages I test (into the mock chroot, a convenient hack) and run rpmlint on them but I don't think many other reviewers do. BTW, I build on x86_64 and almost always using rawhide. -- 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
