[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480
--- Comment #20 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-29 07:42:28
EDT ---
Among the man pages, CmdWrite, Handles and CmdWrite seems to be
part of tcl documentation and not tclx.
True. These pages were excluded.
It seems to me that TclXInit.3 and Keylist.3 should be in the devel
package, since they are associated with the C interface.
Moved into devel package.
Also TclXInit.3 is partly wrong because doing -ltclx won't work,
one needs to use -L /usr/lib/tcl8.5/tclx8.4/ -ltclx8.4. However
one could imagine that users wanting to use tclx like that
know that the object is in general dlopened and so that they have to find
the library in the tcl paths.
It may be possible to have in devel
%{_librir}/libtcl.so - /usr/lib/tcl8.5/tclx8.4/libtclx8.4.so
and ship an /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ file to add the path to ldconfig.
However I think that it would be wrong since there is no soname.
This package hadn't new release for long time and I don't think it's needed to
do some bigger changes.
I'd still like to know more precisely why utf-8 locale needed
to avoid truncating help files.
I'm also curious why. I removed it, 'cause I didn't find the reason.
http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/tclx/tclx-8.4.0-12.fc10.src.rpm
http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/tclx/tclx.spec
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480 --- Comment #22 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-29 08:50:01 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=317970) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=317970) minor fixes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480 --- Comment #21 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-29 08:48:53 EDT --- Looks good now. I'll attach a diff for the spec file with additional minor fixes, feel free to take what you want. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480 --- Comment #23 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-29 09:00:45 EDT --- Thanks I like all changes. I rebuilt tclx in cvs: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=849660 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480 Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #24 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-29 10:49:41 EDT --- Thanks, reclosing bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480
--- Comment #19 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-28 10:16:40 EDT
---
Remaining issues:
Still no library installed in ld paths, so the following is unneeded:
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
Among the man pages, CmdWrite, Handles and CmdWrite seems to be
part of tcl documentation and not tclx.
It seems to me that TclXInit.3 and Keylist.3 should be in the devel
package, since they are associated with the C interface.
Also TclXInit.3 is partly wrong because doing -ltclx won't work,
one needs to use -L /usr/lib/tcl8.5/tclx8.4/ -ltclx8.4. However
one could imagine that users wanting to use tclx like that
know that the object is in general dlopened and so that they have to find
the library in the tcl paths.
It may be possible to have in devel
%{_librir}/libtcl.so - /usr/lib/tcl8.5/tclx8.4/libtclx8.4.so
and ship an /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ file to add the path to ldconfig.
However I think that it would be wrong since there is no soname.
There is also a rather innocuous rpmlint warning:
tclx.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 60, tab: line 74)
I'd still like to know more precisely why utf-8 locale needed
to avoid truncating help files.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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=226480 --- Comment #18 from Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-23 07:11:45 EDT --- You persuaded me :) Here is package with bcond http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/tclx/tclx-8.4.0-11.fc10.src.rpm http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/tclx/tclx.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-07 02:45 EST --- Many packages don't have bcond macro. It's only eye candy for spec. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-07 15:34 EST --- All the packages I have reviewed have the bcond macro now. It is not only eye-candy. The use of such conditional is much simpler than one that needs a define. I can do the patch if you want to. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-05 12:09 EST --- Please have a look at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Tcl -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-05 12:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) bcond_with is feature, that's not a bug of spec file. Can you explain why you don't want to use it? It is practical and consistent with other packages. I even remember having seen it in some guidelines, but there shouldn't be a need for guidelines. The review is here to ensure maximal quality, the conditionals are part of it. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-26 11:24 EST --- bcond_with is feature, that's not a bug of spec file. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-27 17:54 EST --- Some issues are still not addressed, reopening. Close when you think everything is done. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-11-22 12:51 EST --- One more think, bcond_with/without should certainly be used instead of _without_check. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-28 03:13 EST --- The paths aren't nice. I'll fix all paths in tcl and related packages after the tcl8.5 will be out. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-27 10:51 EST --- Please have a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Tcl The advocated paths seem better to me than what it used currently. In this draft there is something about the name, but I think that it shouldn't be changed for now. There are comments above that I think should be addressed. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-26 12:01 EST --- From tclx-8.4.0-7.fc7 are removed ldconfig. You was right tclx8.4.so don't seem to be shared 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-20 11:42 EST --- ldconfig - tclx8.4.so is shared library - Packaging guidelines tclx-devel - there is only header file, because library is in tclx and tclx-devel couldn't be install without tclx. guideline No, they didn't. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-20 18:26 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) ldconfig - tclx8.4.so is shared library - Packaging guidelines Doesn't seems so to me. tclx8.4.so seems to be a dlopened object file, not a shared library. It is in /usr/lib/tclx8.4/ so ldconfig won't find it anyway. tclx-devel - there is only header file, because library is in tclx and tclx-devel couldn't be install without tclx. Since there is no shared lib, maybe the tclx-devel package isn't useful. I am not sure whether it is right or not not to have a shared library. What is your opinion on that subject? guideline No, they didn't. Maybe you should? -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-20 18:28 EST --- As a side note, I don't think that this package should be considered to be clean given the issue of the dlopened versus shared libs issue. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-13 20:42 EST --- * The call to autoconf shouldn't be needed. If you want to restore the configure timestamp, you can do touch -r configure.2.relid configure but I don't think that it is needed. * The RPM_OPT_FLAGS are overwritten. I suggest using make all CFLAGS_DEFAULT= CFLAGS_WARNING= but maybe there are cleaner ways. * could you please expand on: # utf-8 locale needed to avoid truncating help files LANG=en_US.UTF-8 make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT * the ldconfig call seems completly unuseful to me: there is no library that can be linked against. * the documentation on using tclx is lacking. There is a README with instructions, but it refers to a man page that isn't bundled (TclX_Init.3). Looking at that man page it seems to refer to a library that isn't bundled?? * Related issue is should the man pages in doc/ be installed? * is the header file of any use without lib to link against? * why is tix mentioned in the -devel description? * Did you have a look at the tcl draft guideline? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Tcl It may not be final, but maybe there are already things to use? -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-08 07:59 EST --- Look right now. -- 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 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-03-07 11:41 EST --- make test fixed W: tclx no-documentation W: tclx-devel no-documentation removed doc package and add doc into tclx package. Packages are updated (time to time) and their structure and amount of files should be dependent on flow from tclx to tcl. I removed only the doc 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
fedora-review requested: [Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
Bug 226480: Merge Review: tclx Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Component: Package Review Marcela Maslanova [EMAIL PROTECTED] has asked for fedora-review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226480] Merge Review: tclx
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: tclx https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226480 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added 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
