[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Jiri Kastner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
  Flags|needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co |
   |m)  |
Last Closed||2022-05-10 04:12:08



--- Comment #27 from Jiri Kastner  ---
closing


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Guy Streeter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co |needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co
   |m)  |m)



--- Comment #26 from Guy Streeter  ---
I can't see a way for me to close this issue. I opened it, and I don't care
about it any more.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

needinfo canceled: [Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review

Guy Streeter  has canceled Package Review
's request for Jiri Kastner
's needinfo:
Bug 1256492: Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl
library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #26 from Guy Streeter  ---
I can't see a way for me to close this issue. I opened it, and I don't care
about it any more.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Guy Streeter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(guy.streeter@gmai |
   |l.com)  |



--- Comment #24 from Guy Streeter  ---
I have retired. Nobody ever used this but me, and I don't any more.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Jiri Kastner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(guy.streeter@gmai
   ||l.com)



--- Comment #23 from Jiri Kastner  ---
@guy.stree...@gmail.com can you please update with current python guidelines?
(python2 removal and so on) if this request is still actual for you?
also python-hwloc


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Jiri Kastner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co |
   |m)  |




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

needinfo canceled: [Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review

Jiri Kastner  has canceled Package Review
's request for Jiri Kastner
's needinfo:
Bug 1256492: Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl
library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||ppi...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Jiri Kastner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|jkast...@redhat.com |cz172...@gmail.com



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Guy Streeter  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||guy.stree...@gmail.com



--- Comment #21 from Guy Streeter  ---
The git repo for python-libnuma is now at
https://gitlab.com/guystreeter/python-libnuma.git

and my email is guy.stree...@gmail.com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #15 from Jiri Kastner  ---
why "ExclusiveArch:  x86_64" is not buildable for arm and i386 which are also
primary architectures?
why not use this like in packaging guidelines for python?

%build
%py2_build
%py3_build

%install
# Must do the python2 install first because the scripts in /usr/bin are
# overwritten with every setup.py install, and in general we want the
# python3 version to be the default.
%py2_install
%py3_install

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #16 from Guy Streeter  ---
As far as I know, only x86_64 has NUMA architecture. When I started this,
libnuma was only available on that architecture.
I see that it is available for the rest now, so I can remove that arch
restriction.

I'll test the py?_build macros to see if they will work. I had problems using
them before.

The py?_install macros should be OK. They seem to do the same thing my command
does. I'll change that.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #18 from Guy Streeter  ---
numactl is not being built for arm:

* Sat Jun 18 2011 Peter Robinson  - 2.0.7-2
- Exclude ARM platforms

I've copied the ExcludeArch line from the numactl specfile to mine.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #17 from Guy Streeter  ---
The py3_build/install macros are not available in Fedora 21. They were added to
F22.
I'll change the python2 commands to use the macros, but leave the python3
commands as they are until F21 End Of Life.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #19 from Guy Streeter  ---
Above changes checked in.

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1418
https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/streeter/python-hwloc/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #14 from Guy Streeter  ---
I've committed version 2.2.3-2.0:
 removed %clean
 added %check
 stripped the binary
 added license text to source files.

Built in koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11098362

Available in copr:
https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/streeter/python-hwloc/

What else should I do? Are there things in the fedora-review that I need to
address?

thanks,
--Guy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #13 from Jiri Kastner  ---

This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are
also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla:
- Add issues you find to the list of issues on top. If there isn't such
  a list, create one.
- Add your own remarks to the template checks.
- Add new lines marked [!] or [?] when you discover new things not
  listed by fedora-review.
- Change or remove any text in the template which is plain wrong. In this
  case you could also file a bug against fedora-review
- Remove the "[ ] Manual check required", you will not have any such lines
  in what you paste.
- Remove attachments which you deem not really useful (the rpmlint
  ones are mandatory, though)
- Remove this text



Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
  in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
  for the package is included in %license.
  Note: License file COPYING is marked as %doc instead of %license
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[ ]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
 attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed
 output of licensecheck in /home/indy/packaging/review/python-libnuma
 /review-python-libnuma/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 61440 bytes in 4 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
 process.
[ ]: A package which is used by 

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #7 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com ---
for example dnf:
upstream - https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf
and fedora git tree for package -
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dnf.git/tree/ for specfile and patches

tarball is in sideload

usig fedpkg try this:

fedpkg clone -a dnf

and clone from github dnf repo.
srpm or tar.gz you can get using tito build --tgz or tito build --srpm.

from that you can see, that from one upstream source is generated one
spoecfile, one tarball and srpm.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #8 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com ---
I understand now. I thought you were saying I should make a specfile that would
be edited to produce each package, one at a time.
I can create a specfile that builds both packages at the same time. I'll start
work on that.
thanks,
--Guy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #9 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com ---
+1 :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #10 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com ---
How does this look?

$ rpm -qlp SRPMS/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc21.src.rpm
python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.tar.gz
python-libnuma.spec

$ rpm -qlp RPMS/x86_64/python2-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc21.x86_64.rpm 
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/libnuma.so
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/python2_libnuma-2.0-py2.7.egg-info
/usr/share/doc/python2-libnuma
/usr/share/doc/python2-libnuma/COPYING
/usr/share/doc/python2-libnuma/LICENSE
/usr/share/locale/en_US/LC_MESSAGES/python2-libnuma.mo

$ rpm -qlp RPMS/x86_64/python3-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc21.x86_64.rpm 
/usr/lib64/python3.4/site-packages/libnuma.cpython-34m.so
/usr/lib64/python3.4/site-packages/python3_libnuma-2.0-py3.4.egg-info
/usr/share/doc/python3-libnuma
/usr/share/doc/python3-libnuma/COPYING
/usr/share/doc/python3-libnuma/LICENSE
/usr/share/locale/en_US/LC_MESSAGES/python3-libnuma.mo

I followed the example in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Common_SRPM_vs_split_SRPMs

koji scratch build
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10858080

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #11 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com ---
[indy@localhost python-libnuma]$ rpmbuild -bs
~/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-libnuma.spec 
Wrote: /home/indy/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc22.src.rpm
[indy@localhost python-libnuma]$ cp
~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc22.src.rpm .
[indy@localhost python-libnuma]$ fedora-review -n python-libnuma
INFO: Processing local files: python-libnuma
INFO: Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from : Local files in
/home/indy/packaging/review/python-libnuma
INFO:   -- SRPM url:
file:///home/indy/packaging/review/python-libnuma/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc22.src.rpm
INFO:   -- Spec url:
file:///home/indy/packaging/review/python-libnuma/python-libnuma.spec
INFO: Using review directory:
/home/indy/packaging/review/python-libnuma/review-python-libnuma
INFO: Downloading (Source0):
https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-libnuma.git/snapshot/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.tar.gz
WARNING: Cannot download url:
https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-libnuma.git/snapshot/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.tar.gz
INFO: Using local file python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.tar.gz as Source0
INFO: Running checks and generating report
INFO: Results and/or logs in:
/home/indy/packaging/review/python-libnuma/review-python-libnuma/results
INFO: WARNING: Probably non-rawhide buildroot used. Rawhide should be used for
most package reviews
INFO: Build completed
INFO: Installing built package(s)
INFO: Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
ERROR: 'Source0: upstream source not found' (logs in
/home/indy/.cache/fedora-review.log)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #12 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com ---
I forgot to push a tag for it. There is am upstream source file now.
--Guy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #4 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com ---
The combined specfile would have to be edited and checked in to build each of
the packages, one at a time. I don't see an advantage to that.

Keeping them separate will also allow fixes and updates to be made
independently for the two packages.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #6 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com ---
I promise I'm not trying to be difficult. If that's the correct way to set it
up, I'll change it.

Perhaps there's something about the way packages are built in the distro I
don't understand. I assumed a src.rpm was submitted to the the build system. Is
that incorrect? Not being a maintainer, I haven't ever participated in that
process.

I've looked for information about how you get from source code to built package
in the repo, but I can't find it. If I knew that, I could make sure my source
is prepared for it. Do you have a link to that?

I'd be really happy to see something that says this is how your source tree
should be laid out.

thanks,
--Guy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #5 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com ---
hey man, do you want to get package reviewed? :)
one specfile means one review, less mess.
i'm not aware of any package maintained in way you want to go.
i would understand your attitude if resulting specfile would look like kernel
specfile, but that is exception.
with two specfiles and two srpms in case of abandoning python2 in future of
fedora means retiring packages.
i would also understand your attitude if you will have two separated
repositories, but you you have code in one repo.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jkast...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jkast...@redhat.com



--- Comment #1 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com ---
instead of 2 specfiles, ther should be one and not in rpm/SPECS folder but in
toplevel directory (good for tito for example and for rpmbuild too).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #2 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com ---
Jiri,
 Thank you for reviewing this package.

The source is used to build two separate packages, python-libnuma and
python3-libnuma. That's the reason there are 2 specfiles.

I don't know what tito is. Is that something I need?
Why does rmpbuild need the specfiles in the top-level directory?

The package is designed to build and install from setup.py for platforms that
don't use rpm. It seems like packaging-specific files should be in their own
directory. tuna, python-linux-procfs, and python-schedutils all have this
directory layout.

The top-level Makefile has a target to build rpms.

thanks again,
--Guy

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492



--- Comment #3 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com ---
tito - https://github.com/dgoodwin/tito

rpmbuild with -tX options works on tarball directly if spec file is in toplevel
directory

you can have one specfile and put all to it. and use 
%global with_python3 1
%if 0%{?with_python3}
...
%{__python3} setup.py build
...
%endif

see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Python3.4GuidlinesDraft

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1083720




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1083720
[Bug 1083720] Review Request: python-hwloc - Python bindings for hwloc
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review