Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: regexp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226366 ------- Additional Comments From vivekl@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-09 14:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > MUST: > X rpmlint on regexp srpm gives no output > W: regexp non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java > Perhaps: System Environment/Libraries ? It seems use of the existing group is acceptable: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-February/msg00070.html > X package meets packaging guidelines. > . BuildRoot incorrect. As per this: > %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) Amended. > . do we need section free? Its a redundant JPackage artifact, removed. > X specfile is legible > . do we still need the crazy gcj_support line? AFAICR the incantation was added so native compilation (i.e. arch dependence) could be specified on a build machine directly without the need to modify spec files. However, brew prevents the use of machine specific settings, hence the use of the %define at the top. However, if the packages are built on mock, such settings can be provided on the build machine and the hardcoded %define can be removed. > X source files match upstream > . I can't find the tarball. Also, Source0 can be the actual URL ending with the > tar.gz. Really? With Source0:http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/regexp/jakarta-regexp-%{version}.tar.gz wget http://www.apache.org/dist/jakarta/regexp/jakarta-regexp-1.4.tar.gz brings in the tar ball fine for me. Note the replacement of %{version} in the URL. Surely the use of the macro is not a problem? > X BuildRequires are proper > . why is jpackage-utils in Requires(pre,post)? According to the guidelines, all directories created by the package must be owned by the package or the package must require a package that provides the directory. Directories like %{_javadir} and %{_javadocdir} (/usr/share/java, /usr/share/javadoc) are provided by jpackage-utils and since the package tries to install/uninstall things to these directories, I think the presence of these directories ought to be mandated for the package to be installed/uninstalled. > X package owns all directories and files > . why is the javadoc symlink not just made in %install and then added to the > %file section? Fixed. The %pre and %post scriptlets for the javadoc are there for multiple versions of the javadoc package to coexist and the unversioned symlink allows crosslinking of javadocs. > X final provides and requires are sane > Do we need a 'java' dependency somewhere? Does the (erroneous, I think) > Requires(pre,post) on jpackage-utils imply a regular Requires on it? Do we > need things in coreutils (rpm, ln) in Requires(post,postun)? Added the Requires on java The Requires(x) on jpackage-utils has been commented on above. As far as the question of /bin/rm and /bin/ln in the requires(x) is concerned, this is to ensure that rpm transactions ensure these are present before the installation/uninstallation of the package since the %pre and %postun scripts use them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review