https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103420 --- Comment #14 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Jerry James from comment #13) > Issues: > 1. The package Requires are not right. The Requires that should be in the > python3 subpackage are in the main package instead. But the Requires > declaration for the python3 subpackage under "%package -n > python3-autowrap". Ops! Fixed. > > 2. Having said that, why are python2-devel/python3-devel needed? I can see > the need for Cython and boost-devel, but why pythonX-devel? pythonX-devel files are used for testing ... gcc -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches -m64 -mtune=generic -D_GNU_SOURCE -fPIC -fwrapv -DNDEBUG -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches -m64 -mtune=generic -D_GNU_SOURCE -fPIC -fwrapv -I/usr/include/boost -fPIC *-I/usr/include/python2.7* -c itertest.cpp -o build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.7/itertest.o -Wno-unused-but-set-variable > > 3. I am not convinced that this package should be archful. What can go wrong > if it is noarch? Also, rpmdiff shows that the only differences between > i386 and x86_64 builds are in the byte compiled python files, which is > probably just timestamp differences. So if something can go wrong if the > package is noarch, then I believe that same thing will go wrong with the > package as it is currently constituted. (Note also that the files are > installed in %{pythonX_sitelib}, which is for non-arch-specific modules; > they would go in %{pythonX_sitearch} otherwise.) This has been an explicit request in the previous review: >> When thiking about the pkg's Requires and the intended functionality, I'm >> *strongly* tending to the conclusion, this *MUST* be arch'ed and needs to >> have %{?_isa}-Requires… > > 4. I question the usefulness of including CONCEPT and README_DEVELOP in %doc. > Those do not seem to provide any information that users of this package > will need. Well, they are informations however on software development. > > 5. The entry "%{__python3}-autowrap" in the python3 %files section is, in my > opinion, an abuse of the %{__python3} macro. Please change that to read > "%{_bindir}/python3-autowrap". Okay, fixed. > > 6. What is the purpose of the "find ... | sed ..." invocations in %prep? As > far as I can see, they do exactly nothing. > They are copy residuals from another package. Fixed. SPEC: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/python-autowrap/autowrap.spec SRPM: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/python-autowrap/autowrap-0.5.0-3.20140603git1753b9.fc20.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7215646 -- 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