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: eclipse-mylar - A task-focused UI for Eclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232725 ------- Additional Comments From fitzsim@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-03-19 20:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > > - the tarball creation steps worked, but an md5sum on the result didn't match > > the source tarball. Maybe the "tarball recipe" could be modified to always > > produce a tarball with the same md5sum, perhaps by sorting the files list > > and manipulating timestamps... > > I'm not sure if this is possible. Is is a blocker? Nope, just a suggestion for a future improvement. > > - are all those Requires and Provides commented because of the missing > > dependencies in Rawhide, or some other reason? > > They're part of my plan to rework how we do BRs and Rs for Eclipse plugins. I'd > like to keep them if that's okay. They'll be uncommented and used in the future. Sure, sounds fine. > > - the %build an %install indenting is inconsistent (not a big deal) > > You mean the \'s? I fixed the one that looked weird to me. I just meant the number of spaces used to indent a wrapped shell command (5 spaces in %build, 1 in %install). > > > X macros used appropriately and consistently > > - %{buildroot} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > What's wrong here? You mix the use of %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -- the packaging guidelines say you should use one or the other consistently. > > I'm getting this build failure: > > Hmm. That's with the latest rawhide Eclipse package? If so, can you post > <buildroot>/home/workspace/.metadata/.log? Actually, the yum update I attempted didn't pull in the latest packages. I'm trying again with: yum update eclipse\* I'll post my build results and the outstanding post-build review items later. -- 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