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: PyX - Python graphics package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190247 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-04-30 00:52 EST ------- FYI, theres an open ticket for the mkhowto issue: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177349 PyChart is working around it by including a copy of Python's Doc directory. I see no problems with simply shipping the formatted manual from upstream, but you should probably treat it as any other upstream source and provide a full URL. Issues: The build fails on x86_64 (both FC5 and development): gcc -pthread -shared -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.4/pyx/pykpathsea/pykpathsea.o -lkpathsea -o build/lib.linux-x86_64-2.4/pyx/pykpathsea/_pykpathsea.so /usr/bin/ld: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.0/../../../../lib64/libkpathsea.a(tex-file.o): relocation R_X86_64_32S against `kpse_format_info' can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.1.0/../../../../lib64/libkpathsea.a: could not read symbols: Bad value collect2: ld returned 1 exit status error: command 'gcc' failed with exit status 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.12911 (%build) I'm afraid I have no idea at all what that means, except for "recompile with -fPIC", and -fPIC already on all of the gcc command lines so I assume it's complaining about /usr/lib644/libkpathsea.a. A quick search leads to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=150085. Anyway, it builds fine on i386, so you'll need to ExcludeArch: x86_64 at least (no way to test PPC, sorry) and then open a bug on the failed x86_64 build and have it block FE-ExcludeArch-x64 (and have 150085 block it). rpmlint complains: E: PyX non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/pyx/graph/axis/tick.py 0644 (and 41 additional complaints about other files) These files all contain #!/blah/python lines. Those scripts aren't intended to be executable, so those shebang lines need to be removed. Note that they aren't consistent; graph/axis/timeaxis.py is the only .py file not to have such a line. This is the only blocker that I can see. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible and included in the package. * source files match upstream: bfab7bbc4f3442c946f489133df515f0 manual.pdf bfab7bbc4f3442c946f489133df515f0 manual.pdf-srpm 5e751cef8d62774a6fc659cc9a03c231 PyX-0.8.1.tar.gz 5e751cef8d62774a6fc659cc9a03c231 PyX-0.8.1.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. O package builds in mock (development, i386) but fails on x86_64. X rpmlint complains about errant shebang lines in all but one .py file. * final provides and requires are sane. * shared libraries are present, but internal to python so no need to call ldconfig. * 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. * .pyo files are properly %ghosted. * %clean is present. * %check is not present; no test suite. * code, not content. * documentation is not exactly small, but not large enough that a -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. -- 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@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review