[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 --- Comment #15 from Lillian Angel lan...@redhat.com 2009-01-19 10:05:20 EDT --- can you comment on t his? $ sudo rpm -Uvh netbeans-platform-6.5-4.fc11.noarch.rpm netbeans-platform-6.5-4.fc11.src.rpm netbeans-platform-harness-6.5-4.fc11.noarch.rpm netbeans-platform-javadoc-6.5-4.fc11.noarch.rpm error: Failed dependencies: netbeans-platform8 = 6.1 is needed by (installed) netbeans-ide9-6.1-9.fc10.noarch netbeans-platform8 = 6.1 is needed by (installed) netbeans-apisupport1-6.1-9.fc10.noarch netbeans-platform8 = 6.1 is needed by (installed) netbeans-6.1-9.fc10.noarch netbeans-platform8 is needed by (installed) java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1:1.6.0.0-8.b14.fc11.i386 netbeans-platform8-harness = 6.1 is needed by (installed) netbeans-apisupport1-6.1-9.fc10.noarch netbeans-platform8-harness = 6.1 is needed by (installed) netbeans-6.1-9.fc10.noarch $ sudo rpm -e --nodeps netbeans-platform8-harness netbeans-platform8 $ sudo rpm -Uvh netbeans-platform-6.5-4.fc11.noarch.rpm netbeans-platform-6.5-4.fc11.src.rpm netbeans-platform-harness-6.5-4.fc11.noarch.rpm netbeans-platform-javadoc-6.5-4.fc11.noarch.rpm Preparing...### [100%] 1:netbeans-platform ### [ 25%] 2:netbeans-platform-harne### [ 50%] 3:netbeans-platform-javad### [ 75%] 4:netbeans-platform warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root ### [100%] error: unpacking of archive failed on file /home/langel/rpmbuild/SOURCES/netbeans-6.5-20081111-ml-platform-src.zip;497495d0: cpio: open failed - Permission denied -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #14 from Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com 2009-01-14 08:44:07 EDT --- The koji build (dist-f11, devel:netbeans-platform-6_5-4_fc11) completed successfully: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1052085 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 --- Comment #10 from Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com 2009-01-13 08:06:10 EDT --- Lillian, Adel, Since release 6.5-2 all netbeans-platform8* packages are obsolete. According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ProvidesObsoletes If a package supersedes/replaces an existing package without being a compatible enough replacement as defined in above, use only the Obsoletes from above. Of course, the document is draft only, but I think it establishes right point that is applicable for this case. All the packages, including netbeans-platform, netbeans-platform-harness and netbeans-platform-javadoc, are *not compatible replacements* for corresponding netbeans-platform8* packages. Therefore, I don't use the Provides clause for all these packages. The next release is prepared. Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform-6.5-4.fc11.src.rpm Changes: - All %post and %preun scriplets are removed. Creation of the .noautoupdate files is completely provided in the %install section. All .noautoupdate files are listed in the corresponding %files sections, so RPM will take care about deleting the files during erasing of the packages. rpmlint results: Results are the same as mentioned above, but, of course, there are 3 additional warnings: - netbeans-platform.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided netbeans-platform8 - netbeans-platform-harness.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided netbeans-platform8-harness - netbeans-platform-javadoc.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided netbeans-platform8-javadoc Successful koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1049128 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com 2009-01-13 14:40:59 EDT --- Thanks for fixing the remaining issues, the package looks fine now. = APPROVED -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com 2009-01-13 15:50:22 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: netbeans-platform Short Description: NetBeans Platform Owners: victorv Branches: F-10 EL-5 InitialCC: -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|adel.gadl...@gmail.com Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-01-13 16:24:05 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 --- Comment #8 from drag...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 06:07:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) (In reply to comment #6) You are not obsoleting the netbeans-platform8 package? so, we will have 2 netbeans-platform* packages in Fedora? I don't agree with this. Yeah, you are right. Without this people have to install the new packages to get a new version a simple update won't drag it in. Also there is no point to ship the old version once the new one is in. Victor, please add this to the spec. Err, he *does* obsolete it but not provide it. So anyone has the old package installed will get the new one via update. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|drag...@gmail.com | --- Comment #9 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 07:25:45 EDT --- used the wrong account for the previous comment, that as me. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 drag...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||drag...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from drag...@gmail.com 2009-01-06 11:46:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) You are not obsoleting the netbeans-platform8 package? so, we will have 2 netbeans-platform* packages in Fedora? I don't agree with this. Yeah, you are right. Without this people have to install the new packages to get a new version a simple update won't drag it in. Also there is no point to ship the old version once the new one is in. Victor, please add this to the spec. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 --- Comment #6 from Lillian Angel lan...@redhat.com 2009-01-05 11:07:30 EDT --- You are not obsoleting the netbeans-platform8 package? so, we will have 2 netbeans-platform* packages in Fedora? I don't agree with this. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 --- Comment #5 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com 2008-12-31 08:00:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) Adel, thanks for review. The next release is prepared. Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform-6.5-3.fc11.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1026772 Changes and comments: - [1] specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. Do we really need the Distrubution tag? AFAIK nothing in Fedora makes use of it. Package groups are handled via comps. I absolutely agree. It is my fault. - The Distrubution tag is deleted OK Changelog: Please remove the 6.1 references because they are not really related to this package.(changelog entries from the former platform8 package) - The 6.1 references are removed from the changelog OK [3] final provides and requires are sane. OK. No any changes. [3] scriptlets are sane rpm -qp netbeans-platform-6.5-2.fc11.noarch.rpm --provides libnb-platform9 = 6.5 netbeans-platform = 6.5-2.fc11 rpm -qp netbeans-platform-harness-6.5-2.fc11.noarch.rpm --provides libnb-platform9-devel = 6.5 netbeans-platform-harness = 6.5-2.fc11 Any reason why they are called libnb-platform9 and libnb-platform9-devel ? Those should be renamed to libnb-plaform/-devel (other packages can use the version to require it). An idea was to support a relation between packages across various Linux distributions. I agree it has not much sense for the Fedora packages. So, to make the package spec more clear for Fedora I've removed it at all. - Specifications of providing non-Fedora packages are removed OK [2] rpmlint is silent. Its not see comments above. The only thing that can/should be fixed are the W: dangerous-command-in-%preun rm warnings, see [4] ... [4] Whats the purpose of the noautoupdate scriptlets? Wouldn't it be better to just package those files (generate them in %install section and add entries in %files). This way rpm will handle the deletion/creation of this files and there would be no need for the scriptlets. By default all the NetBeans packages rely on the RPM facilities to complete updating. Nevertheless, the NetBeans has own update subsystem called as update center. A .noautoupdate file disables auto update of a NetBeans cluster via update center. An idea to create/delete the .noautoupdate files in %post/%preun scriptlets is giving a chance for a user with the root rights to choose an alternative way for updating of the NetBeans clusters. It may be reached if the user will use the RPM option --noscripts for installation of a package (i.e. cluster). Note, this feature won't be used by default. If you agree to save this feature of the netbeans-platform package then I won't change it. Well I am not sure why anyone would want to mess with an rpm installed package this way. If someone does not want to use rpms to update, he should just install the upstream tarball. Also updating this way breaks tracking via rpm and rpm -V will no longer be able to verify the installation. Other packages (ex: firefox) disable this option for the same reason. The update center should only update plugins a user has installed in his home directory, so I think we should just remove the scriptlets and package those files as part of the 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 --- Comment #4 from Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com 2008-12-30 13:21:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Adel, thanks for review. The next release is prepared. Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform-6.5-3.fc11.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1026772 Changes and comments: - [1] specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. Do we really need the Distrubution tag? AFAIK nothing in Fedora makes use of it. Package groups are handled via comps. I absolutely agree. It is my fault. - The Distrubution tag is deleted Changelog: Please remove the 6.1 references because they are not really related to this package.(changelog entries from the former platform8 package) - The 6.1 references are removed from the changelog [3] final provides and requires are sane. OK. No any changes. [3] scriptlets are sane rpm -qp netbeans-platform-6.5-2.fc11.noarch.rpm --provides libnb-platform9 = 6.5 netbeans-platform = 6.5-2.fc11 rpm -qp netbeans-platform-harness-6.5-2.fc11.noarch.rpm --provides libnb-platform9-devel = 6.5 netbeans-platform-harness = 6.5-2.fc11 Any reason why they are called libnb-platform9 and libnb-platform9-devel ? Those should be renamed to libnb-plaform/-devel (other packages can use the version to require it). An idea was to support a relation between packages across various Linux distributions. I agree it has not much sense for the Fedora packages. So, to make the package spec more clear for Fedora I've removed it at all. - Specifications of providing non-Fedora packages are removed [2] rpmlint is silent. Its not see comments above. The only thing that can/should be fixed are the W: dangerous-command-in-%preun rm warnings, see [4] ... [4] Whats the purpose of the noautoupdate scriptlets? Wouldn't it be better to just package those files (generate them in %install section and add entries in %files). This way rpm will handle the deletion/creation of this files and there would be no need for the scriptlets. By default all the NetBeans packages rely on the RPM facilities to complete updating. Nevertheless, the NetBeans has own update subsystem called as update center. A .noautoupdate file disables auto update of a NetBeans cluster via update center. An idea to create/delete the .noautoupdate files in %post/%preun scriptlets is giving a chance for a user with the root rights to choose an alternative way for updating of the NetBeans clusters. It may be reached if the user will use the RPM option --noscripts for installation of a package (i.e. cluster). Note, this feature won't be used by default. If you agree to save this feature of the netbeans-platform package then I won't change it. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||adel.gadl...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Adel Gadllah adel.gadl...@gmail.com 2008-12-29 09:54:24 EDT --- REVIEW: [+] = OK [-] = NOT OK [1] = SEE COMMENTS [?] = WTF? === [+] source files match upstream: sha1: 90bad27d62e4ab5813a200feec2c5ae34e615813 [+] package meets naming and versioning guidelines. [1] specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. [+] dist tag is present. [+] build root is correct. [+] license field matches the actual license. [+] license is open source-compatible. GPLv2 with exceptions or CDDL [+] license text included in package. [+] latest version is being packaged. 6.5-20081111-ml [+] BuildRequires are proper. [+] %clean is present. [+] package builds in koji. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1024679 [+] package installs properly. [2] rpmlint is silent. [3] final provides and requires are sane. [+] owns the directories it creates. [+] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [+] no duplicates in %files. [+] file permissions are appropriate. [3] scriptlets are sane [+] code, not content. [+] %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. [+] no headers. [+] no pkgconfig files. [+] no libtool .la droppings. == COMMENTS: [1] Do we really need the Distrubution tag? AFAIK nothing in Fedora makes use of it. Package groups are handled via comps. Changelog: Please remove the 6.1 references because they are not really related to this package. (changelog entries from the former platform8 package) [2] Its not see comments above. The only thing that can/should be fixed are the W: dangerous-command-in-%preun rm warnings, see [4] [3] rpm -qp netbeans-platform-6.5-2.fc11.noarch.rpm --provides libnb-platform9 = 6.5 netbeans-platform = 6.5-2.fc11 rpm -qp netbeans-platform-harness-6.5-2.fc11.noarch.rpm --provides libnb-platform9-devel = 6.5 netbeans-platform-harness = 6.5-2.fc11 Any reason why they are called libnb-platform9 and libnb-platform9-devel ? Those should be renamed to libnb-plaform/-devel (other packages can use the version to require it). [4] Whats the purpose of the noautoupdate scriptlets? Wouldn't it be better to just package those files (generate them in %install section and add entries in %files). This way rpm will handle the deletion/creation of this files and there would be no need for the scriptlets. Besides those the package/spec looks fine. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475058] Review Request: netbeans-platform - NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475058 Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |netbeans-platform9 -|netbeans-platform - |NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9 |NetBeans 6.5 Platform 9 --- Comment #2 from Victor G. Vasilyev victor.vasil...@sun.com 2008-12-22 10:14:43 EDT --- Lillian, I agree that the updates will be more smooth if the version number will be removed from the package names. Hence: 1. This Review Request is renamed (natbeans-platform9 - netbeans-platform) 2. A new release is prepared: Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/netbeans-platform-6.5-2.fc11.src.rpm Changes: - The platform version number is removed from the package names - Obsoletes are added for the netbeans-platform8* packages There are two rpmlint warnings additionally to the mentioned above: netbeans-platform.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided netbeans-platform8 netbeans-platform-javadoc.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided netbeans-platform8-javadoc due to I've decided that the obsoleting packages are not a compatible replacements for the old ones. Successful scratch koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1016108 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
