https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #38 from Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System ---
whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--
You are receiving th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #36 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
Sorry not sure what happened then.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-revie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #35 from Jon Ciesla ---
Already exists.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
h
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Richard W.M. Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #34 from Ri
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #33 from Jon Ciesla ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Richard W.M. Jones changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #32 from Ri
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Michael Scherer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--
You are receiving t
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
Michael Scherer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #31 from Michael
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #30 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
Updated:
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17.src.rpm
F17 scratch build:
http://koji.fedorapro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #29 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
This doesn't seem to be to do with 32 bit. Xdr.safe_add is
an ocamlnet symbol, and whenproto_aux.ml is a generated file
(from /usr/bin/ocamlrpcgen). We need to add to %build:
rm -f lib/whenproto_au
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #28 from Michael Scherer ---
So it doesn't build on fedora 17 / 32 bits:
make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/whenjobs-0.7.3/lib'
gcc -std=gnu99 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..-I/usr/lib/ocaml -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
-Wp,-D_FOR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #27 from Michael Scherer ---
Yup, this laptop is 32 bits. Let me start again mock and go on with the review.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #26 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
Koji scratch build which I guess proves that it builds on
32 bit ...
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4209135
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #25 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjobs-0.7.3-1.fc17.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #24 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
Are you using 32 bit? This patch was required for 32 bit
ARM:
commit d6da1b74e241e79eb0af9c01e390e98ceead3a49
Author: Richard W.M. Jones
Date: Sat Apr 28 20:40:39 2012 +0100
32 bit: Fix for 31
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #23 from Michael Scherer ---
It doesn't seems to build in mock ( who has been running since 2/3h ).
It seems to block at :
/bin/bash - ./test_run.sh ./t100_counter.ml
Is this expected ( ie, it take a long time, I am running it on a
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=803089
--- Comment #22 from Richard W.M. Jones ---
No, that's not normal. All I can think is that I must have
done a 'make dist' twice and included another copy of the
tarball.
Here is a corrected SRPM:
http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/when
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=803089
--- Comment #21 from Michael Scherer 2012-04-17 16:56:23 EDT ---
Sorry for not updating this review.
While working on the forma
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=803089
--- Comment #20 from Michael Scherer 2012-04-07 06:52:41 EDT ---
Indeed, i tought it would be used for the %build, but that's us
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=803089
--- Comment #19 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-04-06 15:27:33
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> The %global opt is still unused
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=803089
--- Comment #18 from Michael Scherer 2012-04-06 15:12:24 EDT ---
And yes, a new rpm would help me to make sure I can test the bu
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=803089
--- Comment #17 from Michael Scherer 2012-04-06 15:04:13 EDT ---
The %global opt is still unused in the spec, so if the makefile
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=803089
--- Comment #16 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-04-02 15:44:53
EDT ---
This is working out well for me, after about a week
of test
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=803089
--- Comment #15 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-23 14:19:44
EDT ---
I just posted a patch that fixes the Dynlink issue,
but I n
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=803089
--- Comment #14 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-22 12:08:39
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> Fedora-review complaint about t
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=803089
--- Comment #13 from Michael Scherer 2012-03-22 11:47:58 EDT ---
Fedora-review complaint about the address of the FSF in the var
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=803089
--- Comment #12 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-22 09:09:21
EDT ---
It turns out there's a problem with the way I'm using
Dynli
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=803089
--- Comment #11 from Michael Scherer 2012-03-22 06:04:56 EDT ---
Then I think it would be nice to add this fact to the ocaml pac
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=803089
--- Comment #10 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-22 04:42:11
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> So :
>
> - The guideline say th
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=803089
--- Comment #9 from Michael Scherer 2012-03-22 02:56:56 EDT ---
So :
- The guideline say that you should use %global instead of
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=803089
--- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-21 12:02:19
EDT ---
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjob
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=803089
--- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-21 11:59:29
EDT ---
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/whenjobs/whenjob
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=803089
--- Comment #6 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-19 05:44:57
EDT ---
The jobs file is parsed by the OCaml compiler, so whenjobs
c
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=803089
--- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer 2012-03-18 18:21:42 EDT ---
For the rpmlint warning about prelink file, I filled
https://bug
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=803089
--- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones 2012-03-18 05:55:22
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Let me start the review, but I am
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=803089
--- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer 2012-03-17 18:29:16 EDT ---
and regarding the point 6, I looked at the doc and it seems that
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=803089
--- Comment #2 from Michael Scherer 2012-03-17 18:20:35 EDT ---
and one last one, the release do not have %{?dist}.
IIRC, that'
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=803089
Michael Scherer changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
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=803089
Michael Scherer changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
42 matches
Mail list logo
