https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27
testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-136a004437
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.4.20180103git8a875d.fc26 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d8c7f694e9
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.3.20180103git8a875d.fc26 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-ad26aa004e
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System ---
seqan2-2.4.0-0.3.20180103git8a875d.fc27 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-e1b5369a2c
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #23 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/seqan2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
Alec Leamas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #21 from Antonio Trande ---
Everything should be okay now (without packaging release bump).
Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/seqan2.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #20 from Alec Leamas ---
Seems that almost everything from comment #12 is fixed. However:
- According to GL referenced in comment #9, bundled code must be removed
in %prep. However, the awesome font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #19 from Antonio Trande ---
Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/seqan2.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/seqan2-2.4.0-0.2.20180103git8a875d.fc27.src.rpm
- plot.awk/ps2pswLinks.gawk
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #18 from Alec Leamas ---
Again, I think I understand your reasoning. That said, my position is that you
will need to copy all of them. There are a formal and a practical aspect of
this.
Formally, the GL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #17 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #16)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #15)
>
> >
> > All LICENSE files are already included:
> >
> > ## Renamed each single
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #16 from Alec Leamas ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #15)
>
> All LICENSE files are already included:
>
> ## Renamed each single license file
> cp -p apps/rep_sep/LICENSE LGPLv3+.txt
> cp -p
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #15 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #14)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #12)
> > > Hi!
>
> > > ===
> > > - If
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||1331187
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #14 from Alec Leamas ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #13)
> (In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #12)
> > Hi!
> > ===
> > - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #13 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #12)
> Hi!
>
> Things begin to take shape... with issues below fix I'm ready to approve
>
>
> Package Review
> ==
>
> Legend:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #12 from Alec Leamas ---
Hi!
Things begin to take shape... with issues below fix I'm ready to approve
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #11 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #10)
> Some follow-up from another box:
>
> The bundled headers are iostream_bgzf.h, iostream_bzip2.h,
> iostream_bzip2_impl.h,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #10 from Alec Leamas ---
Some follow-up from another box:
The bundled headers are iostream_bgzf.h, iostream_bzip2.h,
iostream_bzip2_impl.h, iostream_zip.h and iostream_zip_impl.h. I assume this
is bundled
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #9 from Alec Leamas ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #8)
> > - seqan2 obsoletes seqan without providing seqan.
>
> It's not needed. seqan2 and seqan must coexist for now.
Well, if they should
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #8 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #6)
> Here comes the full list of issues I see after making a full review:
>
> - seqan2 obsoletes seqan without providing seqan.
It's not
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #7 from Alec Leamas ---
Oops... there is more:
- There is no BR against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang [1].
- Note that this being a library might need also a similar Requires: [1]
[1]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #6 from Alec Leamas ---
Here comes the full list of issues I see after making a full review:
- seqan2 obsoletes seqan without providing seqan.
- seqan2-devel does not depend on seqan2 =
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #5 from Alec Leamas ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #4)
> It's a false problem. Those files are not involved during the compilation
> neither packed in the binary rpms.
Does this also apply to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #3)
> At a glance, here are bundling issues. The library
> util/py_lib/seqan/dox/tpl/lib includes several bundled libraries whih needs
> to be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #3 from Alec Leamas ---
At a glance, here are bundling issues. The library
util/py_lib/seqan/dox/tpl/lib includes several bundled libraries whih needs to
be dealt with. In particular, shouldn't the bundled
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
Alec Leamas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1531955
--- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande ---
Relevant upstream bug regarding SeqAn and OpenMS:
https://github.com/OpenMS/OpenMS/issues/1313#issuecomment-291078025
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
33 matches
Mail list logo