[Bug 1636668] Review Request: wxHexEditor - A graphical Hex Editor

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1636668



--- Comment #8 from John F <johnhford@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Luis Segundo from comment #7)
> Please check this issues
> 
> Issues:
> =======
> - Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.

Those header files aren't actually useful for development and this tool is not
really intended to be a usable library as I understand.  Since that package
isn't something that I actually created myself, my expectation is that the
Fedora system knows which header files are useful for creating a valid
debugsource package.  I couldn't find further information on exactly what
should be in the debugsource package, but using an example of Firefox,

$ rpm -qlp firefox-debugsource-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm | grep "[.]h$" | head
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/aom/AccessibleNode.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/AccessibleWrap.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/ApplicationAccessibleWrap.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/AtkSocketAccessible.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/DOMtoATK.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/DocAccessibleWrap.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/InterfaceInitFuncs.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/RootAccessibleWrap.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/nsMai.h
/usr/src/debug/firefox-62.0.3-1.fc28.x86_64/accessible/atk/nsMaiHyperlink.h

there are 11176 header files in that debugsource file as well as a bunch of cpp
files.

There's more info here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SubpackageAndSourceDebuginfo

> - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
>   are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
>   Note: These BR are not needed: gcc-c++
>   See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2

On Fedora 29 and Rawhide, that's actually a requirement for a successful build.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Remove_GCC_from_BuildRoot

Since it's a no-op on Fedora 28, I suspect that it's not really worthwhile
making conditional for Fedora 28.

> - [!]: 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).

That's because I switched to building the RPM using the rawhide mock
configuration which generated a file with fc30 in the path and forgot to put a
new link to the package.

The correct link is http://johnford.org/wxHexEditor-0.24-1.fc30.src.rpm and I
have deleted the fc28.src.rpm file from my server.

I have updated the Spec and Srpm which the links point to, and I'll upload a
new spec file shortly.

>    none document file?

There aren't really any documentation files as such.  The README.md file
contains nothing useful, though I did fine a GPL.txt and Change.log file in the
repository which I've updated the spec file to include.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux