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=476600 --- Comment #6 from Conrad Meyer <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-29 17:29:21 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Any comments to rpmlint warnings like the following? > > python-BTrees.i586: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package > /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/BTrees/_IOBTree.c > python-BTrees.i586: E: non-standard-executable-perm > /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/BTrees/_OIBTree.so 0775 > python-persistent.i586: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package > /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/persistent/cPersistence.h > python-ZODB3.i586: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package > /usr/include/python2.6/ZODB3/cPersistence.h Yes, after I replied I remembered that I had forgotten to deal with these. My next package will simply remove these files from the install, unless you have a better suggestion. > Have you considered putting sub-modules somewhere else than in the global > namespace instead of creating sub-packages? If it was an executable it could be > put in /usr/share (like for example rpmlint does), but in this case I guess it > could be below /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ZODB? What is upstreams > opinion? (My past experience with Zope is that they have their own strong > sub-community and don't try that hard to fit into system packaging, but instead > recommends building a python from source and not sharing it with anything > else.) I'm not familiar with this; I think it would involve (at least) modifying all the ZODB sources to look for these packages in a different place (or run any program using ZODB with a PYTHONPATH including whatever subdirectory we choose). My particular interest in Zope libraries is for SAGE (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/SciTech/SAGE). > Shouldn't some of the subpackages require a specific version of the others? > There must be a reason the modules are distributed in one tar file? Quite possibly. I must apologize for the sloppy work, I was rushed for time yesterday. > Upstream project on pypi is ZODB3, and ZODB3 is also used in the tar name. But > it provides the ZODB module, and it seems like upstream consistently refers to > it as ZODB (or ZODB 3.9). Shouldn't the package be called python-ZODB instead? This sounds reasonable. New Spec/SRPM: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/python-ZODB.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/python-ZODB-3.9.3-2.fc11.src.rpm -- 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