[Bug 989400] Review Request: rubygem-mini_portile - Simplistic port-like solution for developers

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=989400

Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         QA Contact|extras-qa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+



--- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Mamoru TASAKA from comment #4)
> "That" is _my_ ? Anyway actually old rpm behavior _does_ cause issues when
> %setup is not done beforehand, now I really recalled this:
> 
> http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-February/msg02054.html
> 
> It is much preferable that
> * %setup is done first
> * all %prep action is guaranteed to be done under the directory that %prep
> is created
> 
> And I don't think this is a blocker.

Ah, up until now, I thought you are workarounding different problem. In that
case, I must say I am not fond of this approach, since I very much prefer mock,
which will never suffer this issue. But if you think it helps, it is not a
blocker for me (I am not fan of this gem rebuild stuff anyway).

Otherwise the package looks good => APPROVED. Please fix the Rakefile example
prior importing.

-- 
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=NSlcvErns3&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]