https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327994 Thomas Spura <tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(tomspur@fedorapro | |ject.org) | --- Comment #18 from Thomas Spura <tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the review! Sorry, Orion, for missing your jupyter_core package... Upstream is unfortunately not consistently using either jupyter_core or jupyter-core: https://jupyter-core.readthedocs.org/en/latest/changelog.html (In reply to Jonathan Underwood from comment #13) > [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. > Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python2.7/site- > packages/jupyter_core/tests(python-jupyter_core), /usr/lib/python2.7 > /site-packages/jupyter_core/utils(python-jupyter_core), > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jupyter_core(python-jupyter_core) > > Seems this package is already in Fedora!!!! > [!]: Package does not generate any conflict. > > See above > > [!]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and > Provides are present. > > If this is actually intended by a package rename review, then this > needs addessing The obsoletes/provides of the existing package are added. > ===== EXTRA items ===== > > Generic: > [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. > Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see > attached diff). > See: (this test has no URL) > > Needs fixing! Sorry, for the debug print in the spec. Removed and fixed. > [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. > Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). > > > Rpmlint > ------- > Checking: python2-jupyter-core-4.1.0-3.fc25.noarch.rpm > python3-jupyter-core-4.1.0-3.fc25.noarch.rpm > python-jupyter-core-doc-4.1.0-3.fc25.noarch.rpm > python-jupyter-core-4.1.0-3.fc25.src.rpm > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-2 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-2.7 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-2.7 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-2 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: E: python-bytecode-wrong-magic-value > /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jupyter_core/paths.pyc expected 3350 (3.5), > found 62211 (2.7) > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: E: python-bytecode-wrong-magic-value > /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jupyter_core/__init__.pyc expected 3350 > (3.5), found 62211 (2.7) > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: E: python-bytecode-wrong-magic-value > /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jupyter_core/version.pyc expected 3350 > (3.5), found 62211 (2.7) > > > These look very worrying, suggests the wrong pyton interpreter has > been used for their generation? It seems %py2_build and %py3_build builds (and compiles) in ./build/ and python3 installs the pyc files, generated from python2. Workaround at the beginning of %install: find | grep pyc$ | xargs rm -v This needs proper fixing in distutils... > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-3.5 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-3 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-3.5 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-3 > 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 10 warnings. > > > > > Rpmlint (installed packages) > ---------------------------- > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-2 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-2 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-2.7 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-2.7 > python2-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: E: python-bytecode-wrong-magic-value > /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jupyter_core/version.pyc expected 3350 > (3.5), found 62211 (2.7) > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: E: python-bytecode-wrong-magic-value > /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jupyter_core/paths.pyc expected 3350 (3.5), > found 62211 (2.7) > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: E: python-bytecode-wrong-magic-value > /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/jupyter_core/__init__.pyc expected 3350 > (3.5), found 62211 (2.7) > > > These look very worrying, suggests the wrong pyton interpreter has > been used for their generation? Fixed above. > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-3 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-3 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-3.5 > python3-jupyter-core.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-migrate-3.5 > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 10 warnings. > > > > Diff spec file in url and in SRPM > --------------------------------- > --- > /home/jgu/Fedora/1327994-python-jupyter-core/srpm/python-jupyter-core.spec > 2016-04-19 13:46:32.284247836 +0100 > +++ > /home/jgu/Fedora/1327994-python-jupyter-core/srpm-unpacked/python-jupyter- > core.spec 2016-04-18 21:57:13.000000000 +0100 > @@ -90,4 +90,5 @@ > # Remove shebang from troubleshoot.py > for lib in > %{buildroot}{%{python2_sitelib},%{python3_sitelib}}/jupyter_core/ > troubleshoot.py; do > + ls $lib > sed '1{\@^#!/usr/bin/env@d}' $lib > $lib.new && > touch -r $lib $lib.new && Debug print removed. %changelog - Add obsoletes/provides for jupyter_core - Fix python2 files installed with python3 Spec URL: https://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/python-jupyter-core/python-jupyter-core.spec SRPM URL: https://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/python-jupyter-core/python-jupyter-core-4.1.0-4.fc23.src.rpm -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx