[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092

Christoph Wickert <cwickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|17                          |rawhide

--- Comment #4 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to comment #1)

> You have to write the BuildRequires like that:
> BuildRequires: pkgconfig, gettext, ..., ..., ...

It doesn't matter if one uses one line or several lines.

However there are at least two problems with this package. Benedikt, please
look a little closer at the %files section, maybe you find them. ;)

(In reply to comment #3)
> Why you say that ?
> What's  up ?

Benedikt is right, it doesn't build in mock:

+ /usr/bin/python setup.py build
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "setup.py", line 7, in <module>
    from DistUtilsExtra.command import *
ImportError: No module named DistUtilsExtra.command
Fehler beim Bauen des RPM:
Fehler: Fehler-Status beim Beenden von /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Y6MZro (%build)
    Fehler-Status beim Beenden von /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Y6MZro (%build)
Child return code was: 1
EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output.

=> add python-distutils-extra as BuildRequires.

> Instead I know that 'BuildRequires' entries (like 'Requires') must be listen
> one for line 

As I said, it doesn't matter. I prefer one per line, because this makes it
easier to read in diffs later.

> and where possible indicate in pkgconfig(?) form.

This is not a must either, it has advantages and disadvantages:
Pro: works on different distributions, no matter how they name their packages.
Con: slower because rpm needs to process more dependencies and yum needs to
download more metadata; does not work with old versions of rpm.

-- 
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]