[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341
--- Comment #6 from Roman Rakus rra...@redhat.com 2009-05-06 05:53:09 EDT ---
diff -u -p -r1.18 python-docs.spec
--- python-docs.spec 26 Feb 2009 21:14:56 - 1.18
+++ python-docs.spec 6 May 2009 09:47:22 -
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
%define pybasever 2.6
-Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language.
+Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language
Name: %{python}-docs
Version: %{pybasever}
Release: 2%{?dist}
@@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ Source: http://www.python.org/ftp/python
BuildArch: noarch
Patch4: python-2.6-nowhatsnew.patch
-#Patch17: python-2.4-tex-fix.patch
Patch18: python-2.6-extdocmodules.patch
Requires: %{python} = %{version}
@@ -29,7 +28,8 @@ Obsoletes: python2-docs
Provides: python2-docs = %{version}
%endif
-BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-root
+BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
+
BuildRequires: %{python} python-sphinx python-docutils python-jinja
BuildRequires: python-pygments
URL: http://www.python.org/
@@ -46,19 +46,16 @@ for the Python language.
%setup -q -n Python-%{version}
%patch4 -p1 -b .nowhatsnew
-#%%patch17 -p1 -b .tex-fix
%patch18 -p1 -b .extdocmodules
%build
topdir=`pwd`
-pushd Doc
-make html
+make -C Doc html
#rm html/index.html.in Makefile* info/Makefile tools/sgmlconv/Makefile
-popd
%install
-[ -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ] rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
@@ -66,7 +63,7 @@ mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%files
-%defattr(-,root,root,755)
+%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc Misc/NEWS Misc/README Misc/cheatsheet
%doc Misc/HISTORY Doc/build/html
- What is the stuff at the beginning needed for?
I don't know. The same is in python spec file
- You can use
%{!?pyver: %global pyver %(%{__python} -c import sys ; print
sys.version[:3])}
to get the Python base version.
I don't change it. I think the better is to set version by hand.
- Patches are not documented.
Patches are from previous package - python. I don't know what they were
solving...
- Commented patches should be removed.
Commented lines removed. Patches aren't in cvs.
All else should be fixed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-06 06:22:23 EDT --- OK, please commit the new spec to CVS so I can approve. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341 --- Comment #8 from Roman Rakus rra...@redhat.com 2009-05-06 06:50:58 EDT --- done -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-06 07:40:14 EDT --- - You might want to add -p to mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in install phase. - Also, you can remove the unnecessary topdir=`pwd` from the build phase. The package has been APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341
--- Comment #4 from Roman Rakus rra...@redhat.com 2009-04-27 10:55:08 EDT ---
diff -u -p -r1.18 python-docs.spec
--- python-docs.spec 26 Feb 2009 21:14:56 - 1.18
+++ python-docs.spec 27 Apr 2009 14:52:41 -
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
%define pybasever 2.6
-Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language.
+Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language
Name: %{python}-docs
Version: %{pybasever}
Release: 2%{?dist}
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%files
-%defattr(-,root,root,755)
+%defattr(-,root,root)
%doc Misc/NEWS Misc/README Misc/cheatsheet
%doc Misc/HISTORY Doc/build/html
Is it ok?
python-docs.src:28: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes python2-docs
Any idea which version?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341 --- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-04-27 11:40:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) %files -%defattr(-,root,root,755) +%defattr(-,root,root) %doc Misc/NEWS Misc/README Misc/cheatsheet %doc Misc/HISTORY Doc/build/html Is it ok? Should be %defattr(-,root,root,-) python-docs.src:28: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes python2-docs Any idea which version? This isn't a problem. Please address the issues in comment #1. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||james.ant...@redhat.com, ||rra...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-04-24 16:39:23 EDT --- Please address the issues above. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-04-11 06:32:43
EDT ---
- What is the stuff at the beginning needed for?
- You can use
%{!?pyver: %global pyver %(%{__python} -c import sys ; print
sys.version[:3])}
to get the Python base version.
- Patches are not documented.
- Commented patches should be removed.
- BuildRoot should be
%(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
- Remove topdir, pushd and popd and use
make -C Doc
instead.
- Remove buildroot check from install.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226341] Merge Review: python-docs
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=226341
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-04-11 06:52:41
EDT ---
rpmlint output:
python-docs.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot Documentation for the Python
programming language.
python-docs.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot Documentation for the Python
programming language.
python-docs.src:28: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes python2-docs
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. NEEDSFIX
- See stuff mentioned above.
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. NEEDSFIX
- Why %defattr(-,root,root,755)?
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. OK
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
