[Bug 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora Version|devel |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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-23 13:17 EST --- Built on FC5 and devel. Made entries in owners.list and comps-fe5.xml.in and comps-fe6.xml.in. Thanks for the 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-22 11:16 EST --- I split off a doc package with the contents of the www directory: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/smarteiffel-2.2-5.src.rpm -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|Reopened| OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-22 15:14 EST --- This looks good to me. 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-21 23:54 EST --- After running through my checklist, the only remaining issue I have is that the installed package is about 91MB, but 68MB of that is documentation which does bring up the question of whether the documentation should be in a subpackage. What do you think? (Honestly I'd prefer not to have to build this again, but there really is a big pile of documentation there.) 68128 ./usr/share/doc 81508 ./usr/share 91228 ./usr 91244 . * source files match upstream: 77b3ab3895c6fced2cb1649b4ca80547 SmartEiffel-2-2.tar.bz2 * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * 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. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none) * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo would be empty and is disabled. * rpmlint has only acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: config(smarteiffel) = 2.2-4.fc6 smarteiffel = 2.2-4.fc6 = /bin/sh config(smarteiffel) = 2.2-4.fc6 * %check is not present; no runnable test suite. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. ? documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * headers (and various source files) are installed as appropriate for a compiler. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-19 18:14 EST --- Ok, I removed the execute bits from the files in docdir. http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/smarteiffel-2.2-4.src.rpm -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-12 16:07 EST --- Sorry, I currently quite busy with the final stage of my PhD studies. But I will work on it, as soon as I find more time. -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-08 18:07 EST --- Were you going to cut a new package? (In reply to comment #6) I don't think it makes much sense to change the settings in /etc/serc. Seems reasonable to me. I always thought that /usr/libexec is the standard directory for executables that are called as subprocesses and not directly by the user. It is; the packaging committee codified this and hopefully rpmlint will be patched to stop warning about this soon. Hmm, if I chmod 0644 these files, I must also remove the shebang. Not as I understand things. Maybe I should move the contrib directory to /usr/share/SmartEiffel. I'm not sure it would be worth it. Just remove execute permission and anyone who wants to play with those files can copy them. -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-24 06:46 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) I agree about the debug package; there's no point in it. I can't seem to reach upstream to download the source tarball at the moment. I will use the current download url: http://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/586/SmartEiffel-2-2.tar.bz2 W: smarteiffel conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/serc Not sure what's up here. Is it expected that the user will need to edit this file? If upgrading risks overwriting expected local configuration then noreplace is indeed the proper thing to do, but I suppose this may be an occasion where it's not warranted. I don't think it makes much sense to change the settings in /etc/serc. E: smarteiffel zero-length /usr/share/SmartEiffel/short/tex3/hook832 Generally zero-length files shouldn't be packaged, but I think in this case the file needs to be there. (If I understand correctly, it's a formatting hook, where some text could be inserted at various points in some generated output.) yes. W: smarteiffel non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec Seems acceptable to me, or at least in line with other accepted uses of libexec, although I wonder how this would work with multilib. I always thought that /usr/libexec is the standard directory for executables that are called as subprocesses and not directly by the user. I really don't understand the warning, /usr/libexec seems pretty standard to me... W: smarteiffel doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/smarteiffel-2.2/contrib/htmldoc/htmlshort /usr/bin/env (and several others) I don't think these should be executable. (Wow, a program written in Ruby which handles running the SmartEiffel compiler under gdb.) Hmm, if I chmod 0644 these files, I must also remove the shebang. Maybe I should move the contrib directory to /usr/share/SmartEiffel. There are also a few files to patch, paths etc... -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-23 22:32 EST --- I agree about the debug package; there's no point in it. I can't seem to reach upstream to download the source tarball at the moment. Builds fine in mock on x86_64, development; no parallel build, but perhaps that can't be helped as there's not really a makefile. The whole install process is pretty bizarre. (The tarball even includes a windows exe. Weird.) rpmlint spews a pile of warnings, but I'll grep out all of the devel-file-in-non-devel-package warnings as this is a compiler. That leaves: W: smarteiffel conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/serc Not sure what's up here. Is it expected that the user will need to edit this file? If upgrading risks overwriting expected local configuration then noreplace is indeed the proper thing to do, but I suppose this may be an occasion where it's not warranted. E: smarteiffel zero-length /usr/share/SmartEiffel/short/tex3/hook832 Generally zero-length files shouldn't be packaged, but I think in this case the file needs to be there. (If I understand correctly, it's a formatting hook, where some text could be inserted at various points in some generated output.) W: smarteiffel non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec Seems acceptable to me, or at least in line with other accepted uses of libexec, although I wonder how this would work with multilib. W: smarteiffel doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/smarteiffel-2.2/contrib/htmldoc/htmlshort /usr/bin/env (and several others) I don't think these should be executable. (Wow, a program written in Ruby which handles running the SmartEiffel compiler under gdb.) -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NOTABUG | -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 195683] Review Request: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries
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: smarteiffel - The GNU Eiffel Compiler and Libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195683 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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
