https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System ---
primesieve-7.4-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System ---
primesieve-7.4-2.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #34 from Petr Menšík ---
(In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #26)
> Unblocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR - I've just sponsored Kim.
Thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System ---
primesieve-7.4-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System ---
primesieve-7.4-2.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #31 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System ---
primesieve-7.4-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-7ced30d8d6
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System ---
primesieve-7.4-2.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-aa041346ac
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|POST|MODIFIED
--- Comment #28 from
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #27 from Gwyn Ciesla ---
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/primesieve
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Peter Lemenkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lemen...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #25 from Kim Walisch ---
> Can you retry persuading someone to sponsor you? Having acked review might
> help you.
OK, I'll give it another try.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #24 from Petr Menšík ---
Until you have a sponsor, unfortunately you cannot package your own package.
Yes, having a sponsor is mandatory, that step cannot be skipped.
I am considering becoming a sponsor myself, but not yet able
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #23 from Kim Walisch ---
> Anyway, I am sure this can be corrected before first build. Next steps are
> described on [1].
It is not clear to me what I have to do next. I have read the [1] documentation
but this describes mainly
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Petr Menšík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
--- Comment #22 from Petr Menšík
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #21 from Kim Walisch ---
> Ok, still not follows usual convention of addon packages [1], but that is
> just should.
I was confused by:
> Ok, made mistake with offered Provides in 2):
> Correct version would be:
> Provides:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Petr Menšík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #20 from Petr Menšík ---
Ok, still not follows usual convention of addon packages [1], but that is just
should.
1.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_addon_packages
Package Review
==
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #19 from Kim Walisch ---
I have updated primesieve's spec file and built a new SRPM:
Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kimwalisch/primesieve-rpm/v7.4-1/primesieve.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #18 from Petr Menšík ---
(In reply to Kim Walisch from comment #16)
> > The primesieve GUI application does not work properly using Qt5.
>
> Actually I have now retested this on Ubuntu 18.04 with GNOME and it works
> fine. So the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #17 from Petr Menšík ---
(In reply to Kim Walisch from comment #15)
> > Other than these few issues, package is ready to be packaged in Fedora.
> > Good job for first package!
>
> Thanks! I will fix the issues you have pointed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #16 from Kim Walisch ---
> The primesieve GUI application does not work properly using Qt5.
Actually I have now retested this on Ubuntu 18.04 with GNOME and it works fine.
So the Qt5 issue I mentioned before only affects Windows
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #15 from Kim Walisch ---
> Other than these few issues, package is ready to be packaged in Fedora. Good
> job for first package!
Thanks! I will fix the issues you have pointed out.
> 3) Unless there is expected usage of static
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #14 from Petr Menšík ---
Ok, made mistake with offered Provides in 2):
Correct version would be:
Provides: lib%{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
Just a question, it has also working GUI with a different license (GPLv3). Is
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #13 from Petr Menšík ---
(In reply to Jani Juhani Sinervo from comment #11)
> (In reply to Kim Walisch from comment #10)
> > Thanks for your review.
>
> > The Rpmlint spelling-error warnings are false positives.
>
> Oh, good to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Petr Menšík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #11 from Jani Juhani Sinervo ---
(In reply to Kim Walisch from comment #10)
> Thanks for your review.
> The Rpmlint spelling-error warnings are false positives.
Oh, good to know for future reference! I was actually thinking if
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #10 from Kim Walisch ---
Thanks for your review.
> Issues:
> - ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
> Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in libprimesieve
I actually had that in an earlier version of primesieve.spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Jani Juhani Sinervo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j...@sinervo.fi
--- Comment #9
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #8 from Kim Walisch ---
I have released primesieve-6.4 on GitHub yesterday. Today I have updated the
primesieve spec file and corresponding SRPM package to version 6.4:
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #7 from Kim Walisch ---
Hi Micheal,
I have released a new version of the primesieve spec file and corresponding
SRPM package:
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt ---
> 1)
That is a recent change indeed.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#Shared_Libraries
> 3)
If the package naming bugs you that much, you could go a step
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #5 from Kim Walisch ---
Hi Micheal,
Thanks for your feedback. I have fixed the issues you pointed out and pushed a
new version of the spec and SRPM to GitHub:
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt ---
> %check
> make test
>
> %install
During rpmbuild, %check gets executed _after_ %install, so putting %check below
%install in the spec file is common practice. Sometimes tests
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Kim Walisch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #3 from Kim Walisch ---
Reading through the documentation:
> Use a Release: tag starting with 1 (never 0). Append the Dist tag. Increment
> the release (by 1) for each update you make. Reset to 1 whenever
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
--- Comment #2 from Kim Walisch ---
Thanks for your feedback. I have fixed the issues you pointed out and pushed a
new version of the spec and SRPM to GitHub:
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540335
Iwicki Artur changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fed...@svgames.pl
39 matches
Mail list logo