https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717748 --- Comment #13 from Yannick Brosseau <yannick.brosseau@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > Yannick, > After your libtoolize change I can now build the packages successfully. > I suspect you didn't see the failture from comment #9 before because you > were using rpmbuild locally and you already have a copy of the lttng-ust > libraries in /usr/lib6{,64}. (Having the libraries in the default linker > search path is equivalent to helping ld find them via -rpath-link.) Yes, I also think that could have been the problem. I did a complete clean of lttng-ust before redoing this package. > > Comments on the .spec file follows: > > 1. License should be "LGPLv2 and GPLv2" > > liblttng-ust-ctl/ustctl.c is GPLv2 only and is used to build > liblttng-ust-ctl.so. ust-ctl.h is also GPLv2 only and shipped in the -devel > package. OK Do you think it would be more appropriate to put it into a separate package? > > BTW, lttng-ust being LGPLv2 only precludes using it with > the {,L}LGPLv3 libraries from Samba, which is unfortunate. >From https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility I don't think its a problem to use LTTng-Ust with LGPLV3 application or lib. > 2. BuildRequires userspace-rcu-devel >= 0.6.6 > > -BuildRequires: pkgconfig libuuid-devel userspace-rcu-devel texinfo gcc-c++ > systemtap-sdt-devel > +BuildRequires: libuuid-devel texinfo systemtap-sdt-devel > +BuildRequires: userspace-rcu-devel >= 0.6.6 Good point, forgot that one. > > Remove gcc-c++ from BuildRequires per > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2. > Also remove pkgconfig from BuildRequires since it's not actually used in the > build process. > > Note that installing lttng-ust.pc doesn't require pkgconfig. The pkgconfig > related depencies in -devel would still be automatically picked up by > rpmbuild. > > 3. Unless you're targetting EPEL5, remove the BuildRoot tag, the %clean > section and the second %defattr() in the %files -n %{name}-devel section. OK > > 4. ExclusiveArch and arm > From a quick reading of configure.ac and the git logs, I believe lttng-ust > does support the ARM architecture. I recommend just removing the > ExclusiveArch line unless you have a good reason. > I'll review the list of supported arch and replace it by an explicit ExcludeArch if necessary. > 5. I recommend adding a comment in the .spec on why "--with-java-jdk" isn't > enabled: OK > > 6. Use quotes consistently for %buildroot like other RPM directory name > macros OK > > 7. Upstream recently released lttng-ust-2.0.4 > I looked at the git log and suspect we'd want to pick up the various > deadlock fixes. Yes, good catch, we want those fixes. > I'll approve this review once the above points are addressed. > > On a separate note, while performing this reivew I tried to run the code in > the tests/ directory (the few that were not disabled upstream) and the > example shipped as documentation. But since we don't lttng-tools and the > log viewers packaged, I was only able to verify that the sample and test > programs can be built and run but can't actually see the traces. > > Do you intend to package lttng-tools nad the log viewers? Yes, I intend to do lttng-tools right after finishing LTTng-UST. I plan to do babeltrace soon after, when the 1.0 release is done. (Which should be in a couple of weeks max.) -- 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