[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | nThis|| Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-11 12:43 EST --- cvs done. NEEDSPONSOR removed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-11 12:09 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: classads Short Description: a powerful and flexible, semi-structure representation of data Owners: matt Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: Yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-11 11:35 EST --- Built the latest version: $ mock -r fedora-devel-i386.cfg classads-1.0-0.2.rc3.src.rpm init clean prep This may take a while unpack cache setup build ending done Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result $ d /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result total 4124 drwxr-sr-x 2 nsantos mock4096 Feb 11 11:20 ./ drwxr-sr-x 5 nsantos mock4096 Feb 11 11:11 ../ -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 293364 Feb 11 11:20 build.log -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 447566 Feb 11 11:20 classads-1.0-0.2.rc3.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 515001 Feb 11 11:15 classads-1.0-0.2.rc3.src.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 2234000 Feb 11 11:20 classads-debuginfo-1.0-0.2.rc3.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 105224 Feb 11 11:20 classads-devel-1.0-0.2.rc3.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 526831 Feb 11 11:20 classads-static-1.0-0.2.rc3.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 165 Feb 11 11:11 mockconfig.log -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 11824 Feb 11 11:20 root.log $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result/*.rpm $ Looks good, marking as fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-02-09 18:51 EST --- Build issues on F9 resolved (gcc 4.3.0 is strict wrt headers) Test failures necessitated ExcludeArch for ppc, ppc64 and x86_64, with BZs filed that are ready to be assigned to a classads component and block relevant FE-ExcludeArch-* tickets Spec URL: http://grid.et.redhat.com/files/classads.spec SRPM URL: http://grid.et.redhat.com/files/classads-1.0-0.2.rc3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-24 15:43 EST --- The license issue has been resolved. Spec URL: http://grid.et.redhat.com/files/classads.spec SRPM URL: http://grid.et.redhat.com/files/classads-1.0-0.1.rc3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-07 14:54 EST --- I've done a review of the SRPM provided, here are some comments: - tarfile matches upstream with the following md5 sum: $ md5sum classads-1.0rc2.tar.gz d3e08a8706b0ad405048192d5f049d28 classads-1.0rc2.tar.gz - managed to build rpms for i386: $ sudo rpmbuild -ba classads.spec error: Failed build dependencies: pcre-devel is needed by classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386 $ rpm -qa|grep pcre pcre-6.6-1.1 $ sudo rpmbuild -ba classads.spec --nodeps [...] Wrote: /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.src.rpm Wrote: /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm Wrote: /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-devel-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm Wrote: /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-static-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm Wrote: /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm Note: pcre was installed but pcre-devel was not; rpmbuild still completed successfully, so you may want to double check the need for pcre-devel. - rpmlint gives the following output: $ rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.src.rpm W: classads invalid-license Condor Public License W: classads strange-permission classads.spec 0600 $ rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm W: classads invalid-license Condor Public License $ rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-devel-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm W: classads-devel invalid-license Condor Public License $ rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-static-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm W: classads-static invalid-license Condor Public License $ rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm W: classads-debuginfo invalid-license Condor Public License I understand the license issue is being worked on, the specfile permissions should be corrected. - checked provides of the built binary rpms: $ rpm -qp /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm --provides libclassad.so.0 libclassad_ns.so.0 classads = 1.0-0.1.rc2 $ rpm -qp /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-devel-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm --provides classads-devel = 1.0-0.1.rc2 $ rpm -qp /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-static-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm --provides classads-static = 1.0-0.1.rc2 $ rpm -qp /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/classads-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm --provides libclassad.so.0.0.0.debug libclassad_ns.so.0.0.0.debug classads-debuginfo = 1.0-0.1.rc2 Seems the three remaining issues are dealing with the licensing, fixing the permissions on the specfile, and confirming or removing the pcre-devel dependency; everything else looks good. Nuno -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-07 16:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) Note: pcre was installed but pcre-devel was not; rpmbuild still completed successfully, so you may want to double check the need for pcre-devel. The code will use POSIX regex (regcomp/regexec) if pcre is not available, and fall back to no regex support if neither is available. If this is a problem I could probably change the way configure.ac works to fail if pcre is not available, and modify the spec to require pcre during configure's run. Though it might be ok to just not specify --nodeps. I've updated the SRPM to fix the classads.spec permissions, please re-download. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-07 18:08 EST --- Just to clarify, I used --nodeps just to verify the dependency, I'm not suggesting it should be built that way. I would suggest leaving the pcre/pcre-devel dependency in, if that results in a better environment for the program/build. Just built in mock, all looks good: $ mock -r fedora-devel-i386.cfg classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.src.rpm init clean prep This may take a while create cache setup build ending done Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result $ ls -alF /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result total 4492 drwxr-sr-x 2 nsantos mock4096 Sep 7 18:06 ./ drwxr-sr-x 5 nsantos mock4096 Sep 7 18:00 ../ -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 200735 Sep 7 18:06 build.log -rw-rw-r-- 1 nsantos mock 458011 Sep 7 18:06 classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 nsantos mock 894714 Sep 7 18:02 classads-1.0-0.1.rc2.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 nsantos mock 2317851 Sep 7 18:06 classads-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 nsantos mock 100282 Sep 7 18:06 classads-devel-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm -rw-rw-r-- 1 nsantos mock 557919 Sep 7 18:06 classads-static-1.0-0.1.rc2.i386.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 165 Sep 7 18:00 mockconfig.log -rw-r--r-- 1 nsantos mock 19295 Sep 7 18:06 root.log $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result/*.rpm W: classads invalid-license Condor Public License W: classads invalid-license Condor Public License W: classads-debuginfo invalid-license Condor Public License W: classads-devel invalid-license Condor Public License W: classads-static invalid-license Condor Public License -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=253249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253249] Review Request: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured representation of data
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: classads - a powerful and flexible, semi-structured
representation of data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=253249
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-17 15:31 EST ---
Release: number should reflect ONLY the packaging version (IE- the first time
you package= Release: 1, second = Release: 2, etc etc..). It shouldn't have
anything whatsoever to do with the upstream source version. This tends to fall
under naming so consult
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines
Source0 URL should probably be changed to something like
ftp://ftp.cs.wisc.edu/condor/classad/c++/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz I don't know
that it's required, but it'll certainly save you from forgetting to bump up the
version number in Source0: if you ever bump the version of the package.
AFAIK, the CHANGELOG included with the source is only used to reflect changes
made to the upstream source and should not be used to document changes to the
package itself (nor should it be referred to by the packages %changelog
section... I believe the two are to be considered mutually exclusive).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
