https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810676
Björn Persson <bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bioinfornat...@gmail.com,
| |paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr
| |a...@gmail.com
Component|Package Review |0ad
Assignee|bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se |paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr
| |a...@gmail.com
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags| |needinfo?(pa...@zhukoff.net
| |)
--- Comment #32 from Björn Persson <bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se> ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> > · The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
> > → ISSUE: As far as I can see the license should be "GPLv3+ with exceptions
> > and GPLv2+" on the main package, and "GPLv3+" on aws-tools. (Memory_Streams
> > is GPLv2+.)
> Fixed
Version three on the tools, not two.
> > → NOTE: A copy of COPYING3 must be included in aws-doc if its dependency
> > on aws-devel is removed.
> COPYING3 is bringing with main package all subpackages are depends from
> main. Do I have to inclide COPYING3 in aws-doc as well?
I don't see why the -doc subpackage would depend on the main package. The
shared library file is required by programs that are linked to AWS. Users can
read the documents just fine without having the library installed. Did you add
this dependency only to avoid including a copy of COPYING3 in aws-doc? The way
I read the guidelines, subpackages aren't supposed to pull in other packages
only for the license file. Subpackages that depend on a base package for other
reasons don't need to include license files, but the way to add a license file
to an independent subpackage is to include a copy of the file rather than
adding an otherwise unnecesssary dependency.
Relevant sections:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing
> > → ISSUE: Zlib-Ada is now packaged so include/zlib* must be deleted. "-lz"
> > should be deleted from build_aws.gpr, and «with "zlib_ada";» added to
> > build_aws.gpr and aws.gpr. The build dependencies and the dependencies of
> > aws-devel must reflect this.
> Fixed
aws-devel also needs to require zlib-ada-devel, and build_aws.gpr still
contains "-lz" in two places.
If you still can't get the package to build without "-lz", then I need more
information about what errors you get and how to reproduce the problem.
> > · The package must have "BuildRequires: gcc-gnat".
> > → ISSUE: gcc-gnat is missing from the build dependencies.
> Main and -devel packages depend from fedora-gnat-projects-common which
> depend from gcc-gnat.
> package: fedora-gnat-project-common.noarch 3.5-1.fc17
> dependency: gcc-gnat
> provider: gcc-gnat.x86_64 4.7.2-2.fc17
As I told you in the review of Matreshka, fedora-gnat-project-common does not
abstract away Gnat. A package that requires Gnat to build shall say so in the
spec file. As I wrote on the Ada mailing list, I'm considering removing
fedora-gnat-projects-common's dependency on gcc-gnat.
> I'll check debian package but I wouldn't like to bring man pages from
> anywhere and patch it. It's hard to follow any changes in man pages or
> something else.
That's why the policy says that you should try to get the man pages included
upstream.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
