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=575332 --- Comment #5 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-03-21 00:53:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > I few initial questions, > > 1. This > %if ! (0%{?fedora} > 12 || 0%{?rhel} > 5) > construct shouldn't be necessary, is it? the > %{!?python_sitelib: ... > conditionals should be sufficient, no? > (not that it hurts anything, just curious) > Correct. I put it in to document for myself (or future packagers) when it will no longer be necessary but the "!?" portion of the python_sitelib definition should be sufficient. > 2. why is this an arch-dependent noarch pkg exactly? > > 3. why do the files need to be in python_sitearch vs python_sitelib? > > (or perhaps the answer(s) to 2,3 are interrelated) Yeah -- bzr itself has a C extension and so it installs into %{python_sitearch}/bzrlib. This is a plugin to bzr and bzr only searches for plugins in its plugin directory: %{python_sitearch}/bzrlib/plugins So it has to be built with knowledge of %{_libdir} on different platforms, hence it can't be noarch. > qbzr.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/qbzr/lib/uifactory.py 0644 > /usr/bin/env Looked at this one -- it has a shebang line because it can be executed to test its functionality. I tend to leave the shebang line in but not make the file executable when that's the case (as upstream won't take a patch to remove the shebang but we don't really have a need to make it executable when we install it from a system package.) -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review