[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 16:48 EST --- This package has been approved. Please close the bug and import (if you haven't already) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:01 EST --- The import was stalled for a few days due to the CVS outage, it was then imported and now we are waiting for branches for FC-5 and FC-6: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded The bug will be closed once it's built etc. Thanks for keeping an eye on this Paul! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-07 18:24 EST --- rpmlint is clean, builds fine in mock (x86) Review Spec file clear and in US English Consistent use of macros FC-5 macro requires (permitted) Upstream tarball md5 is the same as the packaged version License good pkgconfig included for devel package Uses DESTDIR for the install post and postun make sense clean present docs included in main package owns correct files Links with test code Okay, I'm happy with this. Please close the bug and set as NEXT RELEASE APPROVED Please remember that when FC-5 comes up to date with FC-6's mono, the macro will need to be replaced. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-03 06:56 EST --- Hm, well I might have misunderstood something but as far as I know I have fixed all issues. rpmlint is silent apart from a message about the macros that can be ignored in this case I believe. Parallell build is still broken but disabling parallell building effectively fixes that for now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-02 17:05 EST --- Anything happening on this package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-21 17:31 EST --- Thanks Paul most of these are fixed not I think: Spec URL: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/njb-sharp-0.3.0-5.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/njb-sharp.spec I'm unsure regarding 4. mono debug infos, the ELF debug info is generated by the build system, so I beleive it is a question for the builder machine config right? (I never looked into it for ELF even.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-21 17:37 EST --- Don't worry about #4 that much. What typically happens is that debuginfo for mono tends to be built anyway. rpmlint should be used before uploading as it saves a heck of a lot of time when reviewing! monotools is currently awaiting review (if that is of any help ;-p) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-21 17:47 EST --- Yeah OK, point taken (you must be refering to 0.3.0-1) it was a bit late at night, my habit is nominally to rpmlint things first. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-17 15:20 EST --- OK sorry for taking so long: Spec URL: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/njb-sharp-0.3.0-4.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/njb-sharp.spec I fixed the escapes nevertheless, doesn't hurt. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-17 16:48 EST ---
Okay, I'll build this in a minute.
Quick review notes.
1. The macro for %{monodir} is only temporary until FC5 mono is brought in line
with FC6
2. You need to be consistent with your macros - you have %{name} and %name as
well as %buildroot and %{buildroot}.
3. You need to remove the comment about parallel makes being broken - they're
not as it builds fine with them on.
4. Does this generate mono debug info as well as ELF debug info? This is just a
query as monodebugger can then handle it ;-)
5. The rm -f *a line needs to be *.a - *a means any text that ends in a
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-17 16:50 EST --- parallel build is broken on x86 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-08 08:06 EST --- OK, thanks A LOT Paul, I would never have sorted this out myself: Spec URL: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/njb-sharp-0.3.0-3.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://www.df.lth.se/~triad/krad/fc/njb-sharp.spec Only cosmetics on Pauls patch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-08 08:43 EST ---
Okay, the next tasks are these
1. Standardise the macros. I've used %{_bindir} and %{buildroot}. Your original
version used %_bindir et al. You need to have them all as %{} or %_
2. Have you tested to see if the parallel make fails or was this from a
different spec file?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-08 23:51 EST ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Okay, the next tasks are these
1. Standardise the macros. I've used %{_bindir} and %{buildroot}. Your
original
version used %_bindir et al. You need to have them all as %{} or %_
Nope - %{_X} is the quoted version of %_X, they are identical.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-07 11:39 EST --- I cannot rebuild this by mockbuild under FC-devel i386. checking dynamic linker characteristics... cat: ld.so.conf.d/*.conf: No such file or directory GNU/Linux ld.so checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate appending configuration tag F77 to libtool checking for i686-redhat-linux-gnu-pkg-config... no checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes checking for NJB... yes checking for mono... /usr/bin/mono checking for mcs... /usr/bin/mcs checking for monodocer... no configure: error: You need to install monodoc error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.2121 (%build) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.2121 (%build) Error building package from njb-sharp-0.3.0-1.fc6.src.rpm, See build log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-07 12:33 EST ---
Okay, x things.
First, are you intending to have this available for FC5 as well as FC6? If you
are then until mono in FC5 is updated, you'll need a hack otherwise it will be
broken for x86_64
Something like
%if %{?fedora} == 5
%define monodir %{_prefix}/lib
%else
%define monodir %{_libdir}
%endif
You will then need patches for the makefile.am files which point statically to
/usr/lib and change them to @[EMAIL PROTECTED] These patches ONLY need to be
applied if
you're not using them for FC5, so in %setup you have
%if %{?fedora} 5
%patch0 -p1
autoreconf
%endif
(obviously, this will mean you need to include the BRs for autoreconf - IIRC,
it's autoconf, automake and libtool)
2. Anything that is for a pkgconfig *must* be in it's own package - it doesn't
matter if it's a single line or not, it has to be in it's own -devel package.
3. You will need BR pkgconfig and monodoc (there may be some switch in the
configure script which can switch off monodoc). Me, I'd include it as the more
that goes in monodoc, the better.
4. Don't steel from SuSE - their spec files have been known to cause people's
brains to explode, implode and then make a sort of sqe noise.
5. Not sure what you mean about these commented out lines
# These are for /usr/bin/monodoc, part of mono-tools, not part of FC/FE
# and not present in the current mododoc package.
If there is a problem with monodoc, please file a BZ report and I'll fix it.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-07 17:08 EST --- Created an attachment (id=137981) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=137981action=view) New spec file This spec file sorts out the problems already seen and includes the FC5 hackery. Packages built are pretty much clean with rpmlint. I've dropped the makefile patch from the original version of the spec file as it breaks everything under FC6/rawhide on x86_64 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-07 17:09 EST --- Created an attachment (id=137982) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=137982action=view) Patch Patch file for the .pc.in file - it is not applied unless FC6 or above is being used. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-07 17:14 EST --- Packages created with the above spec file are clean as well with mock (x86) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-09 08:14 EST --- Bug #188218 to update banshee to 0.10.12 would benefit from this package. In the meantime, is it possible to configure banshee without njb support? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
