[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719
--- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng ---
I think for this part, we need to update the guideline:
%dir %{octpkgdir}
%{octpkgdir}/*.m
Just
%{octpkgdir}/
Looking forward to your opinion.
Thanks.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719
--- Comment #2 from Orion Poplawski ---
Well, I think the original concern was to not list %doc %{octpkgdir}/doc-cache
twice - but I don't think it really matters. Just tested on F20 and EL6 and it
seems to work. Also, some of the items in packinfo used to be marked %doc as
well, but octave complains if they are removed so the are not really %doc.
Simplifying to %{octpkgdir}/ is probably good at this point.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 --- Comment #3 from Orion Poplawski --- Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/octave-netcdf.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/octave-netcdf-1.0.2-2.fc20.src.rpm * Thu Feb 20 2014 Orion Poplawski 1.0.2-2 - Simplify files -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||cicku...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cicku...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng --- (In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #3) > Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/octave-netcdf.spec > SRPM URL: > http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/octave-netcdf-1.0.2-2.fc20.src.rpm > > * Thu Feb 20 2014 Orion Poplawski 1.0.2-2 > - Simplify files Do we need to update the guideline, any better ways of octave packaging or minor issues need to be take care so far? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Meng ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues:
===
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/octave/packages/netcdf-1.0.2
/doc-cache
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles
- If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
Note: Cannot find COPYING in rpm(s)
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck:
GPL (v2 or later)
-
netcdf/inst/nccreate.m
netcdf/inst/ncdisp.m
netcdf/inst/ncinfo.m
netcdf/inst/ncread.m
netcdf/inst/ncreadatt.m
netcdf/inst/ncwrite.m
netcdf/inst/ncwriteatt.m
netcdf/inst/ncwriteschema.m
netcdf/inst/private/format2mode.m
netcdf/inst/private/nc2octtype.m
netcdf/inst/private/ncloc.m
netcdf/inst/private/ncvarid.m
netcdf/inst/private/oct2nctype.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_attributes.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_constant.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_create.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_datatypes.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_high_level_interface.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_low_level_interface.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_ncwriteschema.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_ncwriteschema_chunking.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_ncwriteschema_group.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_ncwriteschema_unlim.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_scalar_variable.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_scalar_variable.m
netcdf/inst/test_netcdf.m
netcdf/src/__netcdf__.cc
Unknown or generated
netcdf/inst/import_netcdf.m
netcdf/inst/private/test_netcdf_type.m
netcdf/src/PKG_ADD.sh
netcdf/src/autogen.sh
netcdf/src/netcdf_constants.h
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are val
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 --- Comment #6 from Orion Poplawski --- - Duplicate files - that is why it was done the way it was. - COPYING gets installed to: /usr/share/octave/packages/netcdf-1.0.2/packinfo/COPYING not the normal location - but it is there and no need to duplicate it. So at this point I would just go with the -1 version. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 Christopher Meng changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Christopher Meng --- PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Orion Poplawski --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: octave-netcdf Short Description: A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave Owners: orion Branches: f20 f19 epel7 el6 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1066719] Review Request: octave-netcdf - A MATLAB compatible NetCDF interface for Octave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066719 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-02-25 13:15:32 --- Comment #10 from Orion Poplawski --- Checked in and built. Thanks everyone. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
