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=478749 --- Comment #23 from manuel wolfshant <wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-08 19:18:31 EDT --- The good news is that in F-10 the package works OK. I have displayed a vcd from IUSR8.2 examples. There is one problem, but probably this should be taken care by upstream: [wolfy@wolfy tmp]$ dinotrace /tmp/*vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 293 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 300 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 307 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 314 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 321 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 328 of /tmp/wave1.vcd [...] %E, Strange bit value U on line 386 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 387 of /tmp/wave1.vcd %E, Strange bit value U on line 388 of /tmp/wave1.vcd wave1,vcd is in fact part of stock IUS82, that is /tools.lnx86/inca/examples/vhpi/waveform/test/golden/wave1.vcd On EL5 the package does not build: + emacs -batch -f batch-byte-compile dinotrace.el Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/igrep-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/lang-coding-systems-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/php-mode-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/po-mode-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/python-mode-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/rpm-spec-mode-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/rpmdev-init.el (source)... Loading /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/site-start.d/tramp-init.el (source)... While compiling toplevel forms in file /builddir/build/BUILD/dinotrace-9.4a/lisp/dinotrace.el: !! File error (("Cannot open load file" "verilog-mode")) Done error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.88558 (%install) Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated === REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Tested on: F-10/x86_64 [x] Rpmlint output: source RPM: empty binary RPMs: dinotrace.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/dinotrace-9.4a/traces/tempest.bt.gz emacs-dinotrace.x86_64: W: no-documentation => last one is ignorable, first one is a false alert [x] Package is not relocatable. [x] Buildroot is correct (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)) [x] 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. License type as specified by spec: GPLv2 License type as specified by sources: GPLv3+ => see note 1 [x] 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 %doc. [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x] Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. SHA1SUM of source file: f75c339ade8e2e75eedd2e831e7faffbfddf102b dinotrace-9.4a.tgz [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [-] The spec file handles locales properly. [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [x] Package consistently uses macros. [x] Package contains code, or permissable content. [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [!] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. See note 2 [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [x] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x] Final provides and requires are sane. === SUGGESTED ITEMS === [x] Latest version is packaged. [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on: F-10/x86_64 [?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Tested on: [x] Package functions as described. [x] Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct. [-] File based requires are sane. [x] %check is present and the test passes. === Final Notes === 1. License should be changed to GPLv3+. I'll trust you to do that before import. 2. Is the emacs subpackage really supposed to be used without having dinotrace installed? I see no reason to not allow that, but I want your confirmation that this is intentional. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review