[Bug 642858] Review Request: drupal6-footnotes - Allows to easily create automatically numbered footnote references

[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=642858

--- Comment #7 from Sven Lankes <sven@xxxxxxx> 2010-11-22 15:30:13 EST ---
New files:

Spec URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/drupal6-footnotes.spec
SRPM URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/drupal6-footnotes-2.4-2.fc14.src.rpm

> * Note, the Requires that is provided here only works in Fedora, not
>   in EPEL.  To make this spec work in EPEL, where we have both a
>   "drupal" package and a "drupal6" package, the suggestion on the list
>   was to use "drupal6 >= 6.0" here, and have the main Drupal package
>   in Fedora add a virtual Provide matching that Require.  That will
>   require assistance from user "limb," Jon Ciesla, who maintains the
>   base packages for drupal and drupal6.

I'm going to wait until the drupal rename is through in Fedora before 
building this for F15.

> * To work in EPEL, the definition of %drupaldir in the spec should be
>   changed to read:
>   %if %{?fedora}
>   %define drupaldir %{_datadir}/drupal
>   %endif
>   %if %{?rhel}
>   %define drupaldir %{_datadir}/drupal6
>   %endif

Probably hard to not sound arrogant here but let's concentrate on the review 
for fedora. I promise to do the right thing when bringing the package to EPEL.

I've even removed the buildroot-lines and other cruft that is no longer
neccessary for fedora but still needed for EL-5 in the latest update.

> [ FIX ] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.

Argh. I totally missed this.

> The swiftest alternative is probably to do the following:
> %exclude %{drupaldir}/modules/footnotes/footnotes_wysiwyg
> %exclude %{drupaldir}/modules/footnotes/tinymce_footnotes

I've removed this for now. Should anyone ever package tinymce I'll
see if that version can be used for the module.

> The module seems to install and activate fine without it, though I haven't had
> a chance to do a content test on it.

I've just tried it - no problems.

-- 
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]