[Bug 225744] Merge Review: fbset
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=225744 Adrian Reber changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Adrian Reber 2009-02-10 04:58:20 EDT --- I am just mentioning the ExcludeArch bug here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484843 Rest looks good. Source matches upstream. Patches look good. I am not 100% happy with the %makeinstall, but it seems that it creates no problems in this case. So: APPROVED. -- 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 225744] Merge Review: fbset
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=225744
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Prikryl 2009-02-10 04:29:42
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> There is something in the guidelines about %makeinstall:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used
>
Since "make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}" doesn't work and fbset doesn't use
libtool or autotools stuff, I'd not remove the %makeinstall macro.
> And I have seen this:
>
> MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
> architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
> ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
> bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
> on
> that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
> corresponding ExcludeArch line.
>
I created the bug and write ID to the spec file. Check cvs.
--
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 225744] Merge Review: fbset
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=225744
--- Comment #4 from Adrian Reber 2009-02-05 08:52:40 EDT ---
There is something in the guidelines about %makeinstall:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used
The right thing, to conform with the guidelines would be to use:
make install sysconfdir=%{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}
sbindir=%{buildroot}%{_sbindir} mandir=%{buildroot}%{_mandir}
Although, that makes it pretty unreadable. I would say it is up to you which
one you like better.
And I have seen this:
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
There is tracker bug for s390 at:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467765
Please create a bug blocking that one and mention the bug near the ExcludeArch
line.
--
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 225744] Merge Review: fbset
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=225744
--- Comment #3 from Zdenek Prikryl 2009-02-03 04:09:38
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> * change buildroot to be guidelines compliant
Fixed.
> * add comment why %{?_smp_mflags} cannot be used
fbset doesn't use autotool's stuff, it is written by hand. So, you have to use
CFLAGS variable to pass additional options to the gcc.
> * add comment why make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} cannot be used
This is a similar problem like above. In the makefile, there is no such
variable. There is a $(PREFIX) variable which is set by %makeinstall
> * add noreplace to the config (to silence rpmlint)
Fixed.
I committed the new spec into cvs. Please, review it, so I can bump a new
release.
Zdenek
--
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 225744] Merge Review: fbset
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=225744 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net, ||zprik...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter 2009-01-29 09:29:33 EDT --- Zdenek Prikryl is the owner according the PackageDB. Added as cc. -- 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 225744] Merge Review: fbset
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: fbset
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225744
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |medium
Priority|normal |medium
Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-29 08:27 EST ---
This looks pretty much like it can be closed. There are four little points we
should be changed:
* change buildroot to be guidelines compliant
* add comment why %{?_smp_mflags} cannot be used
* add comment why make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} cannot be used
* add noreplace to the config (to silence rpmlint)
--- fbset.spec 18 Jan 2007 15:37:11 - 1.21
+++ fbset.spec 29 Jun 2007 12:24:40 -
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
Patch0: fbset-2.1-makefile.patch
Patch1: fbset-2.1-fixmode.patch
Patch2: fbset-2.1-manfix.patch
-BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-root
+BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
ExcludeArch: s390 s390x
%description
@@ -27,11 +27,13 @@
%patch2 -p1 -b .man
%build
+# %{?_smp_mflags} breaks building
make CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"
%install
rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}
+# make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} does not work here
%makeinstall
%clean
@@ -41,7 +43,7 @@
%defattr(-,root,root)
%{_sbindir}/*
%{_mandir}/man[58]/*
-%config%{_sysconfdir}/fb.modes
+%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/fb.modes
%changelog
* Thu Jan 18 2007 Jindrich Novy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 2.1-24
--
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
