[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #63 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-01-01 04:35:46 EDT --- Thanks. When you think the requested packages can be moved from testing to stable, please revisit the bodhi interface and edit your requests. Closing as NEXTRELEASE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #62 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-28 14:20:41 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #59 from Stefan Seefeld seef...@sympatico.ca 2008-12-26 09:43:20 EDT --- I'm not sure why this only shows up now, but you are certainly right. I removed some long obsolete code and those exit() calls are now gone. Please find the latest spec / srpm at: http://stefan.fedorapeople.org/synopsis-0.11-4.fc9.src.rpm http://stefan.fedorapeople.org/synopsis.spec Thanks, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #60 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-26 10:43:57 EDT --- Okay. -- This package (synopsis) is APPROVED by mtasaka -- Please release new version when ready. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 Stefan Seefeld seef...@sympatico.ca changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #61 from Stefan Seefeld seef...@sympatico.ca 2008-12-26 11:06:35 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: synopsis Short Description: source-code introspection tool Owners: stefan Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #58 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-26 02:49:13 EDT --- Almost godd, however the newest rpms shows one rpmlint: synopsis.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libSynopsis.so.0.11 e...@glibc_2.0 Usually a shared library should not call exit() in the library ($ rpmlint -I shared-lib-calls-exit for details). Would you check this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #57 from Stefan Seefeld seef...@sympatico.ca 2008-12-23 14:13:21 EDT --- Please find a new srpm here: http://stefan.fedorapeople.org/synopsis-0.11-3.fc9.src.rpm and the associated spec file: http://stefan.fedorapeople.org/synopsis.spec Thanks, Stefan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #56 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-12 08:18:42 EDT --- Would you update the status of this bug? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #55 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-19 01:33:00 EDT --- Would you update this srpm again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #54 from Stefan Seefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-22 06:39:12 EDT --- I just submitted QMTest (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468003). I will release Synopsis 0.11 within the next week, and submit an updated source package here at the same time. Thanks, Stefan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 Stefan Seefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |.ca)| --- Comment #51 from Stefan Seefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-19 10:59:00 EDT --- Sorry for my silence. In addition to general business, I have been debating whether or not to submit another package of mine for inclusion into Fedora (which, as I understand, is one way to become sponsored). I'm going to submit a qmtest package (http://www.codesourcery.com/qmtest) within the coming days. Are you the one to review that, then ? Thanks, Stefan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #52 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-19 12:15:59 EDT --- Okay. Then I will wait for your another review request. (By the way would you also update this package, too?) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #53 from Stefan Seefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-19 12:33:32 EDT --- Yes, I'm going to release Synopsis 0.11 in a couple of days, and can submit a new package based on that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #50 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:06:52 EDT --- I will close this bug again if no response is received from the reporter within ONE WEEk. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #49 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-03 02:00:28 EDT --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #48 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-24 12:52:07 EDT --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||.ca) --- Comment #47 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-09-17 11:19:03 EDT --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #40 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-08 11:27:19 EDT --- Don't you have any site where you can put the tarball and the srpm you are using now? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #41 from Stefan Seefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-08 11:36:54 EDT --- Sure, but that's not an official release. I'd like to base the rpm packages on the 0.11 release that I haven't been able to get out yet. (I guess I only need to commit my local changes and run some final tests once they are in, the usual release procedure...) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #42 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-08 12:05:39 EDT --- By the way, to make it sure, what I am waiting for you first is that you submit another review request or you do a pre-review of other person's review request as I wrote as comment 23. This is not related to your site problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #39 from Stefan Seefeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-07 18:19:00 EDT --- Pong (sorry for the latency, now back from vacation). Unfortunately, I'm still struggling with issues with my host. I have some outstanding patches that I want to check in prior to doing the 0.11 release. Please do whatever you feel is most appropriate. I'm definitely interested into getting a new Synopsis release out and getting a fedora package accepted. Thanks for your patience. Stefan -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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=438543 --- Comment #38 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-08-06 09:56:56 EDT --- I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response is received from the reporter within ONE WEEK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-24 13:06 EST --- Again ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-16 13:09 EST --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||ca) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-09 02:07 EST --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |ca) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-19 13:22 EST --- Sorry for being late again. I'm presently being stuck, waiting for my sys admin to resolve an issue on the machine hosting the Synopsis project. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||ca) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-06-12 02:01 EST --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-14 12:49 EST --- Seems good. So I will wait for your another review request or a pre-review of other packages as this is a NEEDSPONSOR ticket (please check my comment 23) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||ca) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-12 11:45 EST --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |ca) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-12 11:48 EST --- Sorry for the silence. I have made all planned changes and am doing some testing now. I expect to upload a new snapshot later today. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-13 00:39 EST --- Here is a new snapshot. The most important changes are code cleanup to remove old XEROX code, and fix the Python parser license header: http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-2008-05-13-1.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02 14:30 EST --- Okay, almost clean. For 0.11-2: * License issue: -- Synopsis/Parsers/Cxx/occ/HashTable.cc Xerox Synopsis/Parsers/Cxx/occ/HashTable.hh Xerox Synopsis/Parsers/Cxx/occ/MetaClass.cc Xerox Synopsis/Parsers/Cxx/occ/MetaClass.hh Xerox Synopsis/Parsers/Cxx/occ/QuoteClass.cc Xerox Synopsis/Parsers/Cxx/occ/QuoteClass.hh Xerox Synopsis/Parsers/IDL/ GPLv2+ Synopsis/Parsers/Python/__init__.py GPLv2+ src/Synopsis/PTree/generation.ccXerox src/Synopsis/gc/libatomic_ops-1.2/tests/GPLv2 src/Synopsis/gc/libatomic_ops/test/ GPLv2 -- ! The license tag Xerox is tagged by spot: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2008-April/msg00035.html - Well, I don't know why Synopsis/Parsers/Python/__init__.py is licensed under GPLv2+. I guess you want to release this as LGPLv2+ (the license holder seems you). Currently, the license tag of synopsis (main) package should be LGPLv2+ and Xerox and GPLv2+. note that Xerox and GPLv2+ are incompatible, however on current situation no legal conflict is happening. The license tags of other subpackages (except for -idl) can be okay with LGPLv2+. (In reply to comment #22) I was wrongly installing libSynopsis.so.0.11 with INSTALL_DATA, not INSTALL_PROGRAM. Now it seems good In my local tests (using mock) I still see errors for all the extension modules, as they end up with 0775 permissions, instead of 0755. Are you not seeing those ? Actually no. rpmbuild appears to invoke 'umask 0022', too, Actually. but those files still appear to be group-writable, i.e. have 0775 permission. Ummm PS: If I make an official release in the coming days, will that be able to ship as part of the upcoming Fedora 9 ? No problem :) Anyway as this is NEEDSPONSOR ticket: - NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html (NOTE: please don't choose Merge Review) Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02 14:43 EST --- OK, thanks for the feedback again. I'm glad to see I'm making progress. :-) Just a little note on the license issue: The XEROX files aren't actually used my my code (I originally forked OpenC++, but have been moving away as I continue development), so I believe I can just strip them off the repository entirely. The IDL parser is indeed licensed under GPL, which is the reason why I split this into a separate binary package (synopsis-idl), so it can be distributed under GPL without any impact on the rest being released as LGPL. the libatomic code is an import, too, and for the fedora binary packages not used (I link to an external libgc). Do you think this conflict between LGPLv2 and LGPLv2+ is a problem ? Should I release as LGPLv2, too ? Thanks, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02 15:12 EST --- (Umm... currently I don't receive any mails.. Perhaps the mail server of my university is down...??) (In reply to comment #24) The XEROX files aren't actually used my my code Umm? Currently they are used as: - 1201 ar rcs opencxx.a occ/HashTable.o occ/Environment.o occ/TypeInfo.o occ/TypeInfoVisitor.o occ/Walker.o occ/Class.o occ/ClassWalker.o occ/MetaClass.o occ/QuoteClass.o occ/Member.o occ/ClassBodyWalker.o 1202 g++ -shared -o ParserImpl.so syn/swalker.o syn/ast.o syn/builder.o syn/type.o syn/dict.o syn/TypeIdFormatter.o syn/decoder.o syn/lookup.o syn/filter.o syn/Translator.o syn/SXRGenerator.o syn/ParserImpl.o opencxx.a -L/builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.11/build/ctemp.linux-i686/src/lib -lSupport -lSynopsis -- The IDL parser is indeed licensed under GPL, which is the reason why I split this into a separate binary package (synopsis-idl), so it can be distributed under GPL without any impact on the rest being released as LGPL. No problem. the libatomic code is an import, too, and for the fedora binary packages not used (I link to an external libgc). Okay. Well, then is this part okay? Well, I don't know why Synopsis/Parsers/Python/__init__.py is licensed under GPLv2+. I guess you want to release this as LGPLv2+ (the license holder seems you). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02 15:21 EST --- Indeed, the XEROX files are all linked in, but the code is never executed. The Python/__init__.py header looks like a typo. I meant to license all my own work under LGPLv2+. I'll submit an appropriate fix. Thanks ! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 12:52 EST ---
For 0.11-1: (please change EVR from next time)
* Redundant BuildRequires
- gc-devel Requires gc so BuildRequires: libgc is redundant
* Requires
- Please check all required packages are specified by Requires
(except for library dependencies which are automatically added
to binary rpms by rpmbuild).
For example, %{py_sitearch}/Synopsis/Formatters/DocBook/Markup/RST.py
contains the lines:
-
10 from docutils import writers, nodes, languages
11 from docutils.nodes import *
12 from docutils.core import *
13 from docutils.parsers.rst import roles
-
This means synopsis should have Requires: python-docutils.
* Macros
--
--with-gc-prefix=%{prefix}
--
- This must be %{_prefix}
* %doc attribute
- Files under %_docdir or %_mandir are automatically marked
as %doc.
* %defattr
- We now recommend %defattr(-.root,root,-)
* Directory ownership issue
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/doc/synopsis-0.11/COPYING
synopsis-0.11-1.fc9.i386
synopsis-devel-0.11-1.fc9.i386
synopsis-idl-0.11-1.fc9.i386
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -qf /usr/share/doc/synopsis-0.11/
file /usr/share/doc/synopsis-0.11 is not owned by any package
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$
--
- The directory %_docdir/%name-%version is not owned by any package.
* Other rpmlint issue:
--
synopsis.i386: W: one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig
synopsis.i386: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig
synopsis.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/libSynopsis.so.0.11
--
Summary
- When only calling /sbin/ldconfig is needed for %post(%postun),
write them in one line and avoid unneeded shell execution as
--
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%posun -p /sbin/ldconfig
--
- %_libdir/libSynopsis.so.XXX.YYY is not stripped.
/usr/lib/rpm/find-debuginfo.sh checks and strips binaries
with execution permission only, and on Fedora generally all
libraries in %_libdir should have 0755 permission.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-29 16:17 EST --- Thanks for the feedback ! I have adressed most of the above in this new snapshot: http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-2008-04-29-1.src.rpm I was wrongly installing libSynopsis.so.0.11 with INSTALL_DATA, not INSTALL_PROGRAM. In my local tests (using mock) I still see errors for all the extension modules, as they end up with 0775 permissions, instead of 0755. Are you not seeing those ? Is that a local problem with my mock installation ? umask defaults to 0002, which results in libs with 0775 permissions. When I set 'umask 0022' I get the correct permissions in a normal build / install. rpmbuild appears to invoke 'umask 0022', too, but those files still appear to be group-writable, i.e. have 0775 permission. If all looks good on your side I'll just declare this to be some local corruption, though. Thanks PS: If I make an official release in the coming days, will that be able to ship as part of the upcoming Fedora 9 ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-28 10:31 EST --- Please at lease change the release number every time you change your spec/srpm because - reviewers and some other people watching a review request usually saves old srpms and check diffs - changing srpm withour EVR (epoch-version-release) simply causes confusion And please write the URLs of spec/srpm here from which we can directly download them by wget -N, for example. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-28 11:24 EST --- The current snapshot srpm is http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-2008-28-04-1.src.rpm. If all goes well this may turn into the Synopsis 0.11 release. Otherwise I'll start incrementing $release for subsequent srpm submissions. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 07:44 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Thanks for the feedback ! It seems this is an incompatibility with yacc (it
works fine with bison). I have fixed this problem, and will submit a new
source
package soon.
I'v been trying to package this on a x86_64 box myself, and run into another
issue. May be you know how to address this:
In my spec file I list files, using the %{_libdir} variable, as per your
earlier
suggestion. This expands to /usr/lib64. However, the buildsystem itself uses
autoconf, which provides a 'libdir' variable, but which expands to /usr/lib.
Thus, my library files end up in /usr/lib, and then rpmbuild tries to find
them
in /usr/lib64, and obviously fails.
What can I do about that ? autoconf and rpmbuild seem to disagree about the
file
system layout. Is there a way around this ? Is this a known issue ?
Thanks !
Fedora/redhat have a patched autoconf that handles the multi-arch lib issue.
Most times, you just need to do:
autoreconf -f -i
and then do configure, build...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 21:01 EST --- Ah, interesting. It isn't the autoconf version that ships with Fedora 8, as that is what I use for development, or is it ? Where can I get that version of autoconf ? Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 21:16 EST --- The autoconf version that ships with F8 has that modification. Just try running autoreconf -f -i as the first build step - I'm pretty sure that fixed a bunch of instances of the problem you are describing in my experience. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 22:00 EST --- Well, I ran 'autoconf' (et al.) on a Fedora 8 x86_64 box, and it replaces @libdir@ by $(exec_prefix)/lib. I even ran 'autoreconf -f -i' just to be sure (even though that shouldn't make a difference, as that only invokes the same autoconf again, IIUC), and indeed, the result remains the same. rpm -qf /usr/bin/autoconf reports 'autoconf-2.61-9.fc8'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 22:53 EST --- Created an attachment (id=303932) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=303932action=view) Workaround patch for lib64 issue lib64 issue is not coming from autotool generated files. I don't know who wrote install_clib.py first, however the culprit is this file ($ grep -r libSynopsis . gives us a great hint :) ) A workaround patch is attached. The build result is http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=585227 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 23:12 EST --- Yes, install_clib.py is mine, and yes, it hardcodes 'lib' into the installation path. However, the version I'm experimenting with delegates installation to the Makefile (as I expected /hoped that at least there autoconf would generate the correct $(libdir) variable. It doesn't. (See my previous mail.) While I understand your patch works for the platforms you tested on, I don't think this is a solution. There are platforms that support both, 32-bit as well as 64-bit version to be installed side-by-side. Doing a 32-bit build on that platform will still find /usr/lib64, and thus wrongly attempt to install the 32-bit libSynopsis.so there. So once again, where can I find an autoconf version that replaces @libdir@ by $(exec_prefix)/lib64 on the appropriate platforms ? (If everything else fails, I have been contemplating a work-around that would involve passing a --libdir variable down to the install command from within the synopsis.spec file, so no matter whether autoconf gets it right, I use whatever rpmbuild wants me to use.) Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-27 23:50 EST ---
(In reply to comment #16)
Yes, install_clib.py is mine, and yes, it hardcodes 'lib' into the
installation
path.
So anyway this file must be fixed, mustn't it?
However, the version I'm experimenting with delegates installation to the
Makefile
What do you mean by this?
While I understand your patch works for the platforms you tested on, I don't
think this is a solution.
So I said workaround
So once again, where can I find an autoconf version that replaces @libdir@ by
$(exec_prefix)/lib64 on the appropriate platforms ?
Umm.. it maybe that I don't understand what you say here, however
on usual configure - make - make install way, we always
pass --libdir=%{_libdir} to configure, so in the sence
@libdir@ is not automatically replaced by %_libdir. Would you
explain what you say here?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-28 00:33 EST ---
Heureka ! :-)
I updated the preview srpm on synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm. I now pass
--libdir=%{_libdir} to configure, and I changed the install_clib command to run
'make install' in src/ (which thus uses the %{_libdir} variable obtained from
rpmbuild). And indeed, with this change mock building synopsis rpms works for
both i386 as well as x86_64. (Yay !)
I still don't understand where a patched autoconf comes into play, but that may
have become irrelevant with this new version.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-26 01:55 EST --- Does not build even on i386 - At least flex byacc are missing from BuildRequires - Even if flex byacc are added to BuildRequires, build still fails http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=584014 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-26 14:00 EST ---
Thanks for the feedback. Is there any particular reason to prefer byacc over
bison ?
As to the build failure, unfortunately I'm unable to reproduce it. I'm now
trying to build via 'mock', so may be things will look different there.
One thing I noticed is an error in your build.log is this:
ln:
creating symbolic link
`/builddir/build/BUILD/synopsis-0.11/src/Synopsis/gc/atomic_ops.c'
: File exists
The appropriate line in configure.ac is:
test -e ${srcdir}/atomic_ops.c \
|| ln -s ${srcdir}/libatomic_ops/src/atomic_ops.c \
${srcdir}/atomic_ops.c
which means the link command should only be executed if the link target doesn't
exist yet. I wonder why this doesn't work for you. Is your version of the shell
buggy ? (This may be unrelated to the final error, I'm merely trying to find any
hints in the build.log that could explain why I can't reproduce the problem.)
Thanks !
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-26 17:17 EST --- (Just a little note to let you know that I can reproduce the error when building via mock. I'll thus be able to track the problem down on my own, thanks.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-26 20:55 EST ---
I have updated the srpm at
http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-0.11-1.fc8.src.rpm to
circumvent the compilation error, by using a pre-installed libgc / libgc-devel
package.
Compilation now succeeds with i368 as well as x86_64, and I see the packaging
error I mentioned earlier:
%{_libdir} is set to /usr/lib64, but Synopsis installed its library into
/usr/lib.
Where does rpmbuild get its _libdir value from ? I can't find any way to
establish on what platforms to install in /usr/lib64, and where to install into
/usr/lib.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-25 11:56 EST --- I just uploaded what I hope may become synopsis 0.11, as srpm: http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-0.11-1.fc8.src.rpm Please note that this is not an official release yet, as I'd rather like to incorporate any changes you may suggest in order to make this acceptable for inclusion into Fedora. Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-22 09:13 EST --- I uploaded an updated the srpm package to the above location at http://synopsis.fresco.org/download/srpm/synopsis-0.10-1.fc8.src.rpm rpmbuild runs fine on i386, but I get errors on x86_64, due to _libdir and py_sitedir variables in synopsis.spec being expanded to 'unexpected' values (see my previous message). Any help is highly appreciated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-19 16:57 EST ---
Thanks for the feedback ! It seems this is an incompatibility with yacc (it
works fine with bison). I have fixed this problem, and will submit a new source
package soon.
I'v been trying to package this on a x86_64 box myself, and run into another
issue. May be you know how to address this:
In my spec file I list files, using the %{_libdir} variable, as per your earlier
suggestion. This expands to /usr/lib64. However, the buildsystem itself uses
autoconf, which provides a 'libdir' variable, but which expands to /usr/lib.
Thus, my library files end up in /usr/lib, and then rpmbuild tries to find them
in /usr/lib64, and obviously fails.
What can I do about that ? autoconf and rpmbuild seem to disagree about the file
system layout. Is there a way around this ? Is this a known issue ?
Thanks !
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-20 01:52 EST --- I must say I cannot investigate what is happening to your source unless your source is given to me. So would you upload your srpm anyway (with fixes as much as possible)? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-17 09:23 EST --- Rebuild failed on dist-f9: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=570545 Even after BuildRequires: byacc is added, build still fails: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=570565 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool.
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: Synopsis - Source-code introspection tool. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438543 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-04-14 14:39 EST --- *** Bug 220393 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
