Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: SBLIM megapackage https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230142 ------- Additional Comments From wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-03-05 14:07 EST ------- Just a few comments from a beginner - all SourceN should be full URL; according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL , one should use smtg similar to Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz - Could you please explain why %dist provided by the build system is not satisfactory and you rely on a specific custom macro (%{?!LINUX_DISTRIBUTION: %define LINUX_DISTRIBUTION fc6}) ? - perl is on the exception list, so it does not need to be listed as BR; OTOH depending on the requirements of the packaged software and on the avenue taken by the on-going discussions which take place these days, perl-devel MIGHT need to be needed. See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-February/msg00025.html for some details. And last but not least, mock build fails. The build log ends with: Binary file /var/tmp/sblim-1-12.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/cmpi/libLinux_NFSv3SettingContext.so matches Binary file /var/tmp/sblim-1-12.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/cmpi/libcmpiOSBase_BootOSFromFSProvider.so mat ches Binary file /var/tmp/sblim-1-12.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/cmpi/libSyslog_ServiceProcess.so matches Binary file /var/tmp/sblim-1-12.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/cmpi/libSyslog_LogRecord.so matches Found '/var/tmp/sblim-1-12.fc6-root-mockbuild' in installed files; aborting error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.44358 (%install) - your approach of including 11 different programs in a single megapackage leads to the situation that, if any of the 11 needs rebuilding, the only solution is to rebuild ALL of them. Even if the version and releases for the non-modified 10 other are preserved, they will still be built (even if they will not be pushed after that) - The actual install is done in a global %build. This kind of violates the current practices. I for one am in favor of keeping the packages separated, with clean and clear (read: %make / %install) specs for each one of them. If needed, a meta-package could also be created so that yum install sblim would pull in all the stuff. Since they are similar, 4 of them have already been approved and provide rather important stuff, I am confident that the reviews would not have problems. -- 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