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=749132 --- Comment #10 from Ricardo Rocha <rocha.porto@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-11-04 11:23:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > Ricardo, > If possible can you at least take the newer file from globus.org since > is after globus switched to the apache license. > > Otherwise this package becomes 'ASL2.0 and Globus' where globus > is now the old defunct Globus license which is today not fedora > approved. There would be no problem getting it approved I'm sure > if that's the only option. I had to also include an additional header - globus_gsi_gss_constants.h - which was commented in the copied file of dpm-dsi (and not in the original). I searched for it first and couldn't find a globus package providing. Guess i'll need to ask for this way to come with globus too. > Mattias's suggestion to request globus exposes this header makes sense, > could you request this so it may get fixed one day. Bug in the fedora tracker or globus? > New items or things I missed first time: > > (i) Can you parallelize the make? > make %{?_smp_mflags} Done. > (ii) Source code does not match. > Your instructions say to use > tar -czvf dpm-dsi-1.8.2.tar.gz dpm-dsi-1.8.2 > however your .src.rpm contains a misnamed tar file only > $ file ../SOURCES/dpm-dsi-1.8.2.tar.gz > ../SOURCES/dpm-dsi-1.8.2.tar.gz: POSIX tar archive (GNU) > > Moreover when I compare what is checkout vs what is in the tar ball they > are different. > $ diff --brief -r dpm-dsi-1.8.2 ../SOURCES/dpm-dsi-1.8.2 > Only in ../SOURCES/dpm-dsi-1.8.2: config.status > Only in ../SOURCES/dpm-dsi-1.8.2: Makefile > i.e these files are only in the .src.rpm and not in the checkout. The contents of the tarball it's my bad, i've fixed it. Regarding the commands... i didn't get it, how is it misnamed? > (iii) Redundant files > %doc LICENSE RELEASE-NOTES > are not needed in devel since it can't be installed without the main package. Fixed. > (iv) dpm-dsi-devel should probably Require It Requires dpm-dsi, which Require do you mean? > (v) Reading the init.d script > if [ `uname -m` = "x86_64" ]; then > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/glite/lib64:/opt/lcg/lib64:$GLOBUS_LOCATION/lib > else > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/glite/lib:/opt/lcg/lib:$GLOBUS_LOCATION/lib > fi > export LD_LIBRARY_PATH > > The /opt directories have no place on FHS system, > would better to junk it or at least case it so does not get used. Should i put a patch for this one in Fedora? It will stay upstream given the same package is used for the gLite installations. > > Everything else from comment #2 is good. > > Other wise looking good. I'll wait for your comments on the items above, and will provide a new version just after. Thanks. -- 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