Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468597 --- Comment #11 from Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-10-26 14:35:16 EDT --- OK, this is why the package ended up being what it is right now: Attempt #1: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=904055 Attempt #2: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=904077 Attempt #3: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=904137 Attempt #4: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=904313 Attempt #5 (current package, successful): https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=904318 The first 4 attempts use .gem and gem install from upstream's source code .tgz, but fail during build although running them through mock locally would succeed. Since I wasn't able to determine how to package the software 1) according to package guidelines, 2) with debuginfo, 3) without -devel ending up in the base package, 4) without /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot borking over binaries that matched the buildroot, I went with packaging it the way that I did (Attempt #5). (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Care to comment? Upstream provides a gem > Then you must use the gem as the source This one is new for me... can you elaborate on the fact that if it's a gem, you must use the upstream provided gem? I can't seem to find the guidelines saying that I should. Thanks in advance! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review