[Bug 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-29 05:57 EST --- Build for FC-6 and FC-7. Added entries in owners.list and comps files. Thanks for the review! -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-27 20:31 EST --- My sincere apologies; I seem to have completely forgotten about this one. The compiler flags certainly look correct now. The debuginfo package looks better as a result. Only the acceptable (since this is a compiler) "devel-file-in-non-devel-package" rpmlint complaints remain. Those were the only problems I was, and they're all fixed. APPROVED -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 19:15 EST --- Here is the latest version: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/6/i386/SRPMS.gemi/lush-1.2.1-1.fc6.src.rpm I fixed the compiler flags and some file permissions. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-15 21:57 EST --- There are still a bunch of files under /usr/share/lush/packages/sn28/examples which prompt non-executable-script errors from rpmlint. What do you think should happen with these? The compiler is called with an odd set of flags. Some of them look to be the normal ones, but then '-O3' is used and '-g' is missing. This causes the debuginfo package to be mostly empty. I tried passing --enable-debug to %configure and this turns on debugging (and fixes the debuginfo subpackage) but drops the optimization flag. I'm not sure what to do here, other than hacking the configure script. * source files match upstream: 95010c360350bf0a489ddb4d4cfa089f lush-1.2.tar.gz 3838fc7de8367a63349635766c657fbf lush-manual.pdf * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. X compiler flags aren't correct. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly X debuginfo package is mostly empty X rpmlint has some complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: lush = 1.2-3.fc6 = libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXft.so.2()(64bit) libXrender.so.1()(64bit) libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers (except those used internally) * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-07 05:40 EST --- I moved the demos to docdir, as well as those etc files that are not related to installation. The buildroot check is disabled. http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/lush-1.2-3.src.rpm -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 18:31 EST --- You could use sed, I suppose. It is imperative, however, that the replacement be the same length as the original string. But this is so fragile that, while it might be a fun exercise, it's almost certainly worse than just leaving things alone. The name of the build root changes depending on who builds the package, so you have to handle the length of the string changing. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 18:18 EST --- I also thought of something like that. Have you got an idea how to do this in the simplest possible manner? -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 18:14 EST --- One other possibility (besides the imminently reasonable one of just leaving things the way they are) is to just edit it out, change the string to spaces or something. If it's really not used, it shouldn't make any difference, and if it were used, it would prevent whatever problematic behavior the check in question is supposed to protect against. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 18:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) > I don't think basically compiling the package in %post is a good idea. I thought of the idea too, and the building is fast, but I think it is really a little overkill just to get rid of an aesthetic issue. BTW, I could also copy the dump file in the build directory, which is exactly the same as the one in the build root, except that it contains the build dir path instead of the build root path. > Seriously, this is one of those things that check-buildroot is just going to > fail on. It remains to decide whether this is acceptable; I believe it is in > this case, but it needs more scrutiny. I straced the running of lush on one of the demos (which triggers some compiling through gcc), and there was not once a reference to the build root. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 12:24 EST --- I don't think basically compiling the package in %post is a good idea. Seriously, this is one of those things that check-buildroot is just going to fail on. It remains to decide whether this is acceptable; I believe it is in this case, but it needs more scrutiny. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 05:50 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > Well, to disable it, you put >export QA_SKIP_BUILD_ROOT=1 > at the end of %install. > > This does get things building, and I think it's acceptable to do this if > there's > certainty that the location of the buildroot isn't placed anywhere where it > might affect the execution of any code. Might it be possible to generate the problematic file in %post in order to avoid this problem? If possible, that would seem to me to be a cleaner solution. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 00:48 EST --- Well, to disable it, you put export QA_SKIP_BUILD_ROOT=1 at the end of %install. This does get things building, and I think it's acceptable to do this if there's certainty that the location of the buildroot isn't placed anywhere where it might affect the execution of any code. Now, for rpmlint: W: lush mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 11) Loads of these: W: lush devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/lush/packages/svm/lasvm/lasvm.c It's a compiler, so devel-file-in-non-devel-package warnings are OK. What remains is a load of non-executable-script errors. These four: E: lush non-executable-script /usr/share/lush/etc/compile-all 0644 E: lush non-executable-script /usr/share/lush/etc/lush-find-string 0644 E: lush non-executable-script /usr/share/lush/etc/make-html-manual 0644 E: lush non-executable-script /usr/share/lush/etc/make-latex-manual 0644 are the only ones that aren't demos or examples. Should they even be packaged? They look like build-time utilities. Should the demos and examples be packaged as documentation? -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-05 11:55 EST --- Lush needs to set a local load path in order to load the source files needed to create the dump. Unfortunately, this load path is stored into the dump file, although it is not needed, since the runtime works correctly. I suggest therefore to ignore the check and disable 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-04 21:42 EST --- On x86_64 rawhide, the compilation completes but the build fails at the rather new check-buildroot stage: + /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot Binary file /var/tmp/lush-1.2-2.fc6-root-mockbuild/usr/share/lush/sys/stdenv.dump matches Found '/var/tmp/lush-1.2-2.fc6-root-mockbuild' in installed files; aborting error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.59323 (%install) So the buildroot is leaking into the installed files somehow. Also, if you really care about it, the spaces/tabs thing is still there. The tabs are on the Patch0: line. -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-25 10:33 EST --- Now builds in FC6 mock (this SRPM will not work on FC5). Spaces/Tab fixed. http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/lush-1.2-2.src.rpm -- 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 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
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: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-25 01:30 EST ---
{Not Official Reviewer}
- Mockbuild is Failed for i386 FC6
unix.c:1072: warning: ignoring return value of 'fgets', declared with attribute
warn_unused_result
gcc -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DNO_DEBUG -Wall -O3 -march=i686
-mmmx -msse -I../include -pthread -I/usr/include/freetype2 -c dldbfd.c
dldbfd.c: In function 'init_global_symbol_table':
dldbfd.c:686: error: too few arguments to function 'bfd_hash_table_init'
dldbfd.c: In function 'link_archive_members':
dldbfd.c:2725: error: too few arguments to function 'bfd_hash_table_init'
dldbfd.c: In function 'dld_find_executable':
dldbfd.c:3188: warning: ignoring return value of 'getcwd', declared with
attribute warn_unused_result
make[1]: *** [dldbfd.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/lush-1.2/src'
make: *** [all] Error 2
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.32198 (%build)
- rpmlint on source rpm is not silent
W: tclabc mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs
The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a
cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both.
Use sed -i -e 's|\t| |g' lush.spec
to remove that rpmlint warning
+ dist tag is present
+ Buildroot is correct
+ source URL is correct
+ License used is GPL
+ License file COPYING is included
+ MD5 sum on tarball is matching upstream tarball
95010c360350bf0a489ddb4d4cfa089f lush-1.2.tar.gz
--
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
