https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808878 Emanuele Di Giacomo <emanuele@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |emanuele@xxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Emanuele Di Giacomo <emanuele@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- First of all, thank you for the submission, I extensively use this library and an official package will be very useful. I have tried the package and run some test scripts on Fedora 31 and everything works fine. Some notes: * eccodes-devel requires eccodes, then I think that "BuildRequires: eccodes" can be removed. * python-eccodes >= 0.9.5 requires at least eccodes 2.16.0, otherwise the following exception is thrown: > AttributeError: function/symbol 'codes_bufr_extract_headers_malloc' not found in library 'libeccodes.so.0.1': /lib64/libeccodes.so.0.1: undefined symbol: codes_bufr_extract_headers_malloc * From python.eccodes 0.9.4, the module gribapi checks the eccodes version and prints a warning if it's lower than the recommended one (see gribapi/__init__.py): - python-eccodes 0.9.4 requires at least eccodes 2.15.0 - python-eccodes 0.9.5 requires at least eccodes 2.16.0 * python-eccodes 0.9.3 is the most recent version of python-eccodes that is built successfully on Fedora 30, CentOS 7 and CentOS 8 (eccodes 2.14), Then, the recommended version could be made explicit in the spec file, e.g. for python-eccodes 0.9.5 it could be: BuildRequires: eccodes-devel >= 2.16.0 Requires: eccodes >= 2.16.0 -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
