[Bug 912960] Review Request: rubygem-gdk3 - Ruby binding of GDK-3.x

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912960



--- Comment #6 from Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ---
Thank you for initial comments

(In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #5)
> rpmlint:
> rubygem-gdk3.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
> /usr/share/gems/gems/gdk3-2.0.2/COPYING.LIB

- Will ping upstream

> rubygem-gdk3.src: W: strange-permission gdk3-2.0.2.gem 0600L

- Will fix on next push (if there is other things to fix on review

> > ruby -Ilib:test ./test/run-test.rb || echo "Please investigate this"
> Why that ||?
> If the test fail, it will not take down whole build. Which is what we
> generally want to, isn't it?

- Well, this is wrapper for gdk, and actually (if test fails)
  debugging it sometimes takes really much times. Sometimes
  even upstream can't fix this in a short time. So unless there
  is apparently critical issue to fix, I want to just notice upstream
  about test failure (if any).

  And for gtk, debugging is much harder...

> I'm really not sure about:
>   %global header_dir  %{ruby_vendorarchdir}
> this is not in guidelines, so it is just IMHO, but... I think (after
> consultation with vondrouch), that header files should go to:
> ["vendorarchhdrdir", "/usr/include/vendor_ruby/x86_64-linux"]
> ------------^^^ notice this
> or 
> $  pkg-config --variable=vendorhdrdir ruby
> /usr/include/vendor_ruby
> which is unfortunately not provided by any macro (as rubygem-foo-devel is
> not usual).
> Can you consider moving header files there?

- Well, 
  * (while currently I am using F-19) actually /usr/include/vendor_ruby
    is not owned by at least ruby-devel and others ... while
    /usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby is owned by ruby-libs.

  * And neither of vendorarchhdrdir or /usr/include/vendor_ruby actually
    does not work (in the meaning that they are not included in include
    path) (see
    http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5850464
    )
  (Well, 

> And if you provide -devel package, should you provide even so-name?
- This is not needed. As in other packages, dlopen'ed modules (i.e.
  not used to be linked against) need not have sonames (and they are
  under subdirectories of /usr/lib, so they don't appear in
  ld library path)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CEa6uxM2T4&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
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]