[Bug 554464] Review Request: python-pebl - Python Environment for Bayesian Learning

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=554464

--- Comment #8 from Tadej Janež <tadej.janez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-06-03 10:52:48 EDT ---
Thanks for a quick reply!

(In reply to comment #7)
> 
> There are some rpmlint warnings (just posting the relevant ones, which are not
> ignorable):
> python-pebl.src:56: W: macro-in-comment %check
> python-pebl.src:57: W: macro-in-comment %{__python}
> 
> -> ignorable, because they remind you to add %check again

I left the %check disabled and added a comment to the .spec file saying why it
is currently disabled.

> python-pebl.src:61: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
> python-pebl.src:62: W: macro-in-comment %{python_sitelib}
> 
> -> Better prefix an %, so this won't show up anymore

Ok, fixed.

> python-pebl.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pebl/_network.so _network.so()(64bit)
> python-pebl.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pebl/_cpd.so _cpd.so()(64bit)
> 
> -> A solution for this is e.g. in bug 537983 comment 27.

Ok, I tried your solution, however, I don't know if I used it correctly.
The output log of rpmbuild still indicates these unnecessary provides:
Finding  Provides: /usr/lib/rpm/find-provides | grep -v -e
'_cpd.so|_network.so'
Finding  Requires: /usr/lib/rpm/find-requires | grep -v -e
'_cpd.so|_network.so'
Provides: _cpd.so _network.so
Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) <= 4.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <=
4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <=
3.0.4-1
Requires: /usr/bin/python libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libpthread.so.0 libpython2.6.so.1.0

However, rpmlint doesn't give the above 2 warnings anymore. What is happening
here?

> python-pebl.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
> /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pebl/_network.so
> python-pebl.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
> /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pebl/_cpd.so
> 
> This is a bit strange... Do you have a debuginfo package? I'm wondering, why
> there isn't one here...

Yes, I see a separate python-pebl-debuginfo-1.0.2-2.fc13.i686.rpm package built
on my system. Also, that is why I don't see the above rpmlint error messages.

> There is /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pebl/test/
> Is that needed at runtime? If not, it would be nice, if you'd delete that (or
> ask upstream to do so).    

Ok, I removed test and test.manual from the final rpm file.

See the new .spec file and .src.rpm at http://tadej.fedorapeople.org/.

-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]