[Bug 866265] Review Request: opentrep - C++ API for parsing travel-focused requests

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866265



--- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> ---
Re: comment 11

> Multilib support with opentrep-config

opentrep-devel.i686 and opentrep-devel.x86_64 conflict with eachother, because
this script contains a hardcoded libdir definition.

There is no extra rule in the packaging guidelines for multilib conflicts in
-devel packages, because they are treated like any other conflicts. Sometimes
with lower priority. Sometimes with mass-filed tickets. There's even a tracker
ticket for such issues in RHEL6 related repos.


> why does the second warning occur?

Because rpmlint cannot tell whether a .so file _really_ belongs into a -devel
package. It's the responsibility of the packager to decide on that. If the .so
file is private shared lib that's part of a Python module, certainly it must
not be moved into an optional -devel package.


> opentrep-0.5.3-3.fc19.src.rpm

$ rpmls opentrep.x86_64|grep pyopentrep
-rwxr-xr-x  /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/opentrep/pyopentrep
drwxr-xr-x  /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/libpyopentrep
lrwxrwxrwx  /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/libpyopentrep/libpyopentrep.so
lrwxrwxrwx 
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/libpyopentrep/libpyopentrep.so.0.5
-rwxr-xr-x 
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/libpyopentrep/libpyopentrep.so.0.5.3
-rw-r--r--  /usr/share/man/man1/pyopentrep.1.gz

So, the man page covers a program, which is not available in $PATH. Trying to
run it with full path:

$ /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/opentrep/pyopentrep
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/opentrep/pyopentrep", line 286, in
<module>
    import libpyopentrep
ImportError: No module named libpyopentrep

Additionally, it's stored in /usr/lib but contains a hardcoded /usr/lib64 (see
comment 9) and therefore causes a multilib conflict.


* "fedora-review -b 866265" reports one source file that is BSD 3-clause
licensed and not LGPLv2+:

*No copyright* BSD (3 clause)
-----------------------------
/var/lib/mock/fedora-20-x86_64/root/builddir/build/BUILD/opentrep-0.5.3/opentrep/basic/float_utils_google.hpp

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
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]