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=504709 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-06-15 03:48:09 EDT --- Hi: (In reply to comment #2) > ! The timestamps in the source gem file are all wrong. Please ask upstream to > correct this. - This is rather the issue on "gem", not this gem specific. > ? rpmlint says > rubygem-gettext_activerecord-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation > Shouldn't the contents of this package be marked %doc ? - I don't think it is needed to mark as %doc the files in the rpm which is already declared as "document rpm" > * Please remove the binary .mo files in %prep - Done at %build > ? The COPYING file you are packaging claims LGPL as the license. > The source files say "You may redistribute it and/or modify it under the same > license terms as Ruby." > Meanwhile the license tag says "GPLv2 or Ruby" > What's going on? :) - Actually from the source code this is licensed under the same license as ruby. Note that ruby is licensed under "GPLv2 or Ruby" (well, a little complicated...), so the license tag should be so. > ? What are these BuildRequires(check)'s for? (I never saw them before. And > Fedora guidelines don't mention them) - The intention for this is that "These BuildRequires is needed only for %check". > * A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. > build.log says > warning: File listed twice: > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/gettext_activerecord-2.0.4/test/test_parser.rb > warning: File listed twice: > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/gettext_activerecord-2.0.4/test/test_validations.rb - See the test case bug 505995. I thought this worked as expected. Workarround applied. > * The indentation seems wrong with this line > * extract messages from models with the rake task. - Fixed. > * Ruby packaging guidelines say that the %build section of the specfile should > be empty and the install should be performed with the command > gem install --local --install-dir %{buildroot}%{gemdir} --force %{SOURCE0} > Any reason why you are doing it differently? - Actually it is under discussion whether "gem install" should completely moved from %install to %prep or %build. This suggestion was from other people but now I also think that "gem install" should not done at %install directly because: - Actually when gem creates C module extension, rubygem guideline already says "gem --install" should be done at %build because of creating debuginfo rpm correctly (and this proposal was from me) - For this package, spec file contains %check. When gem is installed under %buildroot, %check must be done also under %buildroot. This is troublesome when %check (for this package "rake test") creates some additional files because this will cause some unneeded filed to be packaged or causes "installed but not packaged" error. http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/Ruby_on_Rails/rubygem-gettext_activerecord.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/Ruby_on_Rails/rubygem-gettext_activerecord-2.0.4-3.fc.src.rpm * Mon Jun 15 2009 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 2.0.4-3 - Recreate gettext mo files (BR: rubygem(gettext)) - Change BR: ruby(sqlite) -> rubygem(sqlite3-ruby) - Some cleanups -- 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