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=515230 --- Comment #8 from David Sommerseth <davids@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-11-26 09:49:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > For -2: > > * %define -> %global > - I meant here: > ------------------------------------------------------------- > 1 %{!?python_sitearch: %define python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c "from > distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib(1)")} > ^^here^^ > 2 %{!?python_ver: %define python_ver %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print > sys.version[:3]")} > ^^here^^ > ------------------------------------------------------------- Ouch! I oversaw that one. Sorry about that. > * Tarball > (In reply to comment #6) > > First of all, I'm sorry for the mix up between the .src.rpm and the .spec file. > > I'm not sure how that has happened. I'm not in direct control over that web > > space, so I've posted new versions where I have full control over the files. > > The community website will be updated again when the review is completed. > > - Well, is my recognition correct that you are explaining here why > the source tarball changed? (by the way the tarball changed again). The rpms are created by calling 'make rpm' in the source tree. This creates a directory and copy over the needed files and tar is down to a new tarball. This tarball is then used for the rpmbuild which is called via make. When we did this round the last time with the upstream community site, the version numbers did not match complete between the tarball and the spec file, and for some reason I believe an older src.rpm turned up in the community website than what I anticipated. Anyhow, I'm using my space at people.redhat.com now, to avoid any issues. > > * Duplicate files > - Now build.log complains: > ------------------------------------------------------------- > 157 warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/python-dmidecode/pymap.xml > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Note that %files entry: > ------------------------------------------------------------- > %files > foo/ > ------------------------------------------------------------- > (where foo/ is a directory) contains the directory foo/ itself and > all files/directories/etc under foo/: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories#Unversioned Fixed. Unfortunately, I missed that one when reading through the build log yesterday. > !! Requires > (In reply to comment #6) > > In regards to the "Requires" section, this contradicts the message in comment > > #1, where Jason Tibbits says: "rpm finds the delepdency on libxml2.so.2 itself; > > there's no need to specify it manually." And now, rpmlint do give an error: > > > > python-dmidecode.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libxml2-python > > > > I've added it, according to your request, but I am willing to take it away if > > this is not correct. > > - Well, Jason actually said the correct thing (and it has no contradiction > with > my comment). > > Actually > - "Requires: libxml2" is not needed (and should be removed) because > rpmbuild > actomatically detects library related dependency (in this case > libxml2.so.2) > and adds such dependency into binary rpms automatically, which pulls > libxml2 in when trying to install this package by yum. > > - However "Requires: libxml2-python" is needed because rpmbuild cannot > detect > such python module based dependency. > Now rpmlint throws out the error message you pointed out, because the > package name "libxml2-python" contains "lib" string. > However "this one (rpmlint) is bogus; ignore it." (as Jason said). Ahh got it! Okay, then this thing is fixed. I've not done any changes here. Let's hope this version makes you happier :) Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~dsommers/python-dmidecode/python-dmidecode.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~dsommers/python-dmidecode/python-dmidecode-3.10.7-3.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