[Bug 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1178911, ||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=1178912 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|clufter-0.10.1-1.fc22 |clufter-0.10.1-1.fc21 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.1-1.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||clufter-0.10.1-1.fc20 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.1-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|clufter-0.10.1-1.fc20 |clufter-0.10.1-1.fc22 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.1-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clufter-0.10.1-1.fc20 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.1-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clufter-0.10.1-1.fc21 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clufter-0.10.1-1.fc22 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.0-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clufter-0.10.0-1.fc22 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.0-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clufter-0.10.0-1.fc21 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- clufter-0.10.0-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/clufter-0.10.0-1.fc20 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #28 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #29 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Thank you, Jon. Just for the sake of transparency, at the occasion of getting introduced into Fedora, I've bumped the version of clufter to 0.10.0 and also from this point, I'd like to keep packaging only complete tagged versions, not pre-releases as mostly done prior to inclusion. There is a minimal delta to the accepted version: SPEC: https://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.10.0-1.spec SRPM: https://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.10.0-1.fc21.src.rpm -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2015-02-27 09:27:54 -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #25 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- Approving. -- This package (clufter) is APPROVED by mtasaka -- -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: clufter Short Description: Tool/library for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats Upstream URL: https://github.com/jnpkrn/clufter Owners: jpokorny Branches: f20 f21 f22 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #27 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Thank you, Mamoru! -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #24 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- re increase release number: You are right I should be careful about that. As a result, current pre-release (and pre-inclusion) is clufter-0.3.6-0.4.a_a811d08 (see below). re rpm inside rpmbuild: My expectations were that mere read-only query is OK, but in order not to raise the alarms, I've resorted to another approach to the problem description and possible better solution of which I've stated at [bug 1196724] (targetting RHEL in the hope of getting more attention, or is it worth fedora-devel ML discussion?). re bash completion file treatment on scriptlets Changed this as well, makes a perfect sense. SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.6-0.4.a_a811d08.fc21.src.rpm SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.6-0.4.a_a811d08.spec COPR (sorry, this one is actually called clufter-0.3.6-0.2.a_a811d08, and copr builder had some intermittent issues in 1/4 buids, no clue why) https://copr-fe.cloud.fedoraproject.org/coprs/jpokorny/clufter/build/79480/ -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723
--- Comment #23 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org ---
Well, at lease please increase release number
even during review process (i.e. 0.3.XXX - 0.4.XXX)
* Calling rpm inside rpmbuild is forbidden
- While I don't remember where it is written as document
(currently with google I just found
http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/2008/downloads/pdf/Wednesday_130pm_Tom_Callaway_OSS.pdf
page 25), actually I remember that calling rpm inside
rpmbuild process is forbidden.
One of the reason is that rpmdb created inside mock chroot is
created by rpm outside mock chroot - and calling rpm
inside mock chroot may just see rpmdb corruption.
* bash completion file treatment on scriptlets
- Well, on second thought, I think that writing to modify
the actual file (i.e. %_sysconfdir/%name/bash-completion)
rather than ${bashcomp} (this is symlink) is preferable,
- as it clearly shows that scriptlet is modifying files
under %_sysconfdir and actually not modifying the files
under %_datadir.
I think only the above two issues are left.
--
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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Comment #22 is|1 |0 private|| -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(jpokorny@redhat.c | |om) | -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #21 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- ping again? -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jpoko...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(jpokorny@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #20 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- ping? -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723
--- Comment #19 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org ---
Well,
* Files listed twice
--
warning: File listed twice: /etc/clufter/bash-completion
warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/clufter
warning: File listed twice:
/usr/share/doc/clufter-0.3.6a-git.e88876e/fdl-1.3.txt
warning: File listed twice:
/usr/share/doc/clufter-0.3.6a-git.e88876e/gpl-2.0.txt
--
* Directory ownership
- /usr/share/bash-completion/ is not owned unless you install bash-completion
Other things:
* Redundant requires
- Requires: filesystem is not needed.
* Redundant %doc
- Again files / directories under /usr/share/doc is automatically marked as
%doc and redundant %doc for %{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-XXX should be
removed.
* Source using git
- Please follow
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Non-Numeric_Version_in_Release
- Write how to create the source tarball
- It is advised to include date in release number when using snapshot.
* Scriptlet error
--
$ sudo rpm -ivh clufter-lib-general-0.3.6-0.3.a_git.e88876e.fc21.noarch.rpm
Preparing... # [100%]
Updating / installing...
1:clufter-lib-general-0.3.6-0.3.a_g# [100%]
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.BSuniD: line 5: syntax error near unexpected token `'
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.BSuniD: line 5: ` /usr/bin/clufter --completion-bash
${bashcomp} 2/dev/null || :'
warning: %post(clufter-lib-general-0.3.6-0.3.a_git.e88876e.fc21.noarch)
scriptlet failed, exit status 2
--
--
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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723
--- Comment #18 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com ---
Mamoru, sorry for the lag. I was partly busy with an extension to the
arrangement mentioned in [comment 10] (as a byproduct, there is now
an isolated/clufter-agnostic project distill-spec [5]).
I've tried to addresss your remarks and also made a few additional
changes, e.g., there is now a filesystem in Requires for
/usr/share/man/man1:
https://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.6-0.3.a_git.e88876e.fc21.src.rpm
https://copr-fe.cloud.fedoraproject.org/coprs/jpokorny/clufter/build/69760/
Please note that the spec doesn't look entirely sleek now, especially
with the repeated occurrences of 0.3.6a-git.e88876e. This come from
pre-release versioning (its arrangement from the meta-specfile).
Please ignore this for now and once you are otherwise happy, I will
release a proper version and all such occurrences will turn into
%{version} along with other simplifications that will the be
possible at that point.
You can then re-review such a final spec and give me a final ACK.
[5] https://github.com/jnpkrn/distill-spec
--
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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #16 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Well, as I said now bash completion files are to be installed under %_datadir, which means that this file is not expected to be modified. If you want to modify, it must create symlink which points to some files under %_sysconfdir (usually under %_sysconfdir/%name), and modifying file must be done for files under %_sysconfdir. Great point as my temporary solution was just change the path and this /usr/share should be static hadn't occured to me. On the other hand it's not entirely true (after fresh yum update): $ find /usr/share -mtime -1 | grep cache /usr/share/mime/mime.cache /usr/share/mime/text/cache-manifest.xml /usr/share/icons/hicolor/icon-theme.cache /usr/share/applications/mimeinfo.cache So I wonder if it is better to follow what you advised (and expose new risks, e.g., with dangling symlink for whatever reason) or to be a bit liberal and just change the path. - Well, (while I no longer remember when the decision was made), there is already a consensus that || : after %check must be removed. Main issue is how hard is to find anything on this topic (search engines are not really ready for such queries). My original reasoning was that I'd like to be compatible with the current major release of RPM where possible (4), but it seems that there never will be a proper major 5 (see rpm5.org project I don't understand too much) and this is the respective source/change I followed: http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=max-rpm.git;a=commitdiff;h=12e31f963b5273494183eec10466f775ffd04c89#patch3 But I checked specs of several high-profile and will remove that tail. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #17 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- So I wonder if it is better to follow what you advised (and expose new risks, e.g., with dangling symlink for whatever reason) or to be a bit liberal and just change the path http://www.linuxbase.org/betaspecs/fhs/fhs.html#usrshareArchitectureindependentData agrees about a static nature of the files, so I should rather use the symlink variant. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723
--- Comment #15 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@tbz.t-com.ne.jp ---
(In reply to Jan Pokorný from comment #14)
Do I understand it correctly that another suggestion is to use %version
instead of %{version}?
- Well, usually macro is wrapped with bracket (this is preferable to
avoid some confusion), however there are some exceptions (like
parameterized macros) where macro cannot be wrapped.
%post
It was intended to allow for dynamic regeneration of Bash completion file
upon installing/removing plugins (e.g., clufter-lib-pcs that offers a new
command, which should be reflected in the completion file). Currently
this hasn't been tested, I have to look at that.
Well, as I said now bash completion files are to be installed under
%_datadir, which means that this file is not expected to be modified.
If you want to modify, it must create symlink which points to some files
under %_sysconfdir (usually under %_sysconfdir/%name), and modifying file
must be done for files under %_sysconfdir.
Yes, I learnt this from some authoritative docs, and four characters
overhead is negligible enough to put up with that, IMHO.
- Well, (while I no longer remember when the decision was made), there
is already a consensus that || : after %check must be removed.
--
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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- One additional note - Placing bash completion files under %_datadir (currently) means that we no longer treat this as %config file. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723
--- Comment #14 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com ---
Your srpm does not build
Oops, sorry, accidentally I've started COPR build with full-fledged spec
(which passed), the subsequent build was skipped (same NVR/SRPM URL), but
it was at the time I was working on a fixed version already ([comment 11]),
and I hit another problem with COPR build later on [3].
I was hoping to move forward faster (and hence provide updated SRPM sooner)
but still at massaging that.
URL format with %version
I am using a custom file-naming scheme for pre-releases (well, following
what 'python setup.py sdist' produces, and this is not pre-release
specific; mostly because of clashes with RPM versioning) and the original
meta-specfile is accustomed to that. I'll consider making it play better
for standard releases, exactly as you suggest.
Do I understand it correctly that another suggestion is to use %version
instead of %{version}?
%{?_isa} specific depdendency on noarch packages
Ah, %{?_isa} is to be used only within transitive closure of arch-specific
packages only (provided that the dependency itself is not noarch)!
Just for the clarity: the only arch-specific subpackage is python-clufter
as it builds and uses a private binary (ccs_flatten).
%post
It was intended to allow for dynamic regeneration of Bash completion file
upon installing/removing plugins (e.g., clufter-lib-pcs that offers a new
command, which should be reflected in the completion file). Currently
this hasn't been tested, I have to look at that.
Creating beforehand is sort of an optimization: any computation that can
be precomputed (memoized) should be done early, once for all.
completion file
Thanks, I have no idea how could I find this out except for studying spec
of bash-completion! It's a shame that even Packaging Guidelines page
shows off /etc/bash_completion.d [4].
Re: second point, good catch, I'll will make the package own that dir
itself (bash-completion is completely optional).
Re: %config, that's good, it is not a configuration file, really
(should not be backed up, etc.)
%doc
Thanks again for teaching me new stuff.
License (GFDL)
Well, this is embarrassing :)
%files
Thanks.
%files -n usage with having %{name}- prefix
Result of meta-specfile arrangement, will think about that.
usage of || :
Yes, I learnt this from some authoritative docs, and four characters
overhead is negligible enough to put up with that, IMHO.
${ret}
I am aware of set -e, but this is more robust (no macro will
accidentally bring set +e, etc.)
Remove macro-in-comment rpmlint
Ah, this is a result of meta-specfile simplification process
(original contains %%), will fix it.
[3] https://copr-fe.cloud.fedoraproject.org/coprs/jpokorny/clufter/build/68529/
[4]
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:Guidelinesrd=Packaging%2FGuidelines#The_directory_is_wholly_contained_in_your_package.2C_or_involves_core_functionality_of_your_package
--
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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723
--- Comment #12 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org ---
For 0.3.5-1
* Builds
- Your srpm does not build
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8696816
- Parameterized macro (%autosetup) cannot be wrapped with bracket.
- also %verify cannot be wrapped.
* URL format
- For specifying version, better to use %version so that you don't have
to modify URL format when version is upgraded (this type of macro is
better to use)
- Also you can use %{version} in other place (using %version is common)
* %{?_isa} specific depdendency on noarch packages
- is not allowed because this makes that noarch packages non-arch-independent
(%{?_isa} can be expanded into one specific architecture, and on other arch
such noarch rpms cannot be installed)
* %post
- This %post script belongs to no packages (clufter binary rpm itself is
not created)
- Rather creating completion file beforehand and getting rid of %verify
is preferred (for rpm -V).
- And as actually this is done, I don't think this %post is needed
* completion file
- Using %{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/ is obsolete. Move completion file
to %{_datadir}/bash-completion/completions
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-March/180508.html
- and have some package own %{_datadir}/bash-completion/ (and directories
below)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#The_directory_is_owned_by_a_package_which_is_not_required_for_your_package_to_function
* %doc
- Files under %_datadir/doc , %_datadir/man are automatically marked as %doc
and redundant %doc should be removed.
* License
- Files under doc/ are under GFDL so python-clufter should have GPLv2+ and
GFSL
license tag.
* %files
* python-clufter
- %exclude %{_bindir}/clufter is redundant.
% %files -n usage with having %{name}- prefix
- %files -n clufter-cli is sufficient with %files cli
- Similarly, %package lib-general is better than %package -n
clufter-lib-general
%check || :
- The usage || : here is the old craft and should not be used any longer
(There was a discussion / decision about this long times ago - I no longer
remember
when)
- For ${ret}
rpmbuild invokes bash shell with set -e, so if ./run-check exits with
non-0 status
rpmbuild will abort there, so ret=$? is not needed.
* Some rpmlint stuff
- Remove macro-in-comment rpmlint
--
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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #11 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Oh, I've now noticed I should not compress man page on my own. Will fix that. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #10 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- I ended up with something like in [comment 8]: keeping the convoluted spec as a source, but having a way [2] to simplify it on demand, mainly for downstream purposes in order not to scare anybody needlessly :) I hope this makes sense, at least for me it does. New SRPM with such an unwinded spec file in it: http://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.5-1.fc21.src.rpm [2] https://github.com/jnpkrn/clufter/blob/master/misc/distill-spec -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #9 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- At least fix %changelog. For other things, it is recommend to modify, but if you want I try reading them. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #4 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Two more spec changes: - https://github.com/jnpkrn/clufter/commit/a49bc927f0377f23cce2a4b2209148a8276972b4 - https://github.com/jnpkrn/clufter/commit/b0ca43caa28c8b4272c9900a59ca7dd6261f0ab5 http://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.5-0.1.a_git.b0ca43c.fc21.src.rpm -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@fedoraproject.org Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- Taking. First of all, would you explain why do you want to introduce many macros? I have to expand these macros in my mind when reading your spec file... I have to say currently your spec file is very difficult to read. Would you expand macros more so that we can read your spec file easily? -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #6 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Would it help if I commented on those macros in the specfile directly so one has a better picture of what is going on? The point is to omit tedious stuff and touch the specfile as little as possible later on: - be prepared for out-of-release builds, e.g., to have a correct build tag as per [1] automatically according to the tarball name specification (note: at the same time, I represent the upstream, so I can make some firm assumptions) - do not need to specify specific (and redundant) day names in the changelog (especially annoying) - ability to make specific builds for local/custom purposes [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging%3aNamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #7 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- No, again the point is that it is very difficult for other people including me to read your spec file. Even if you comment on your macros, readability does not get better. Other people may touch your spec file after you import your spec file into Fedora git, e.g. on mass rebuild. In that case we have to expand macros you introduced. Especially: - many %clufter_foo definition - unusual %changelog - needless %foo_description makes this spec file very hard to read. You think you want to remove redundancy and while I want to understand it the current difficulty to read must be fixed in the first place. Please follow what other people writes spec files. More explicitly: - Write %changelog in an usual way - Remove use %clufter_foo and expand them - Remove unneeded %foo_description . Anyway you need not write duplicate description in subpackages. Write main description only on main package. - Remove clufter_bashcomp clufter_script conditional. These are not needed. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #8 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- OK, point taken. I will see what I can do about that ... in the corner case I may use the current arrangement as a meta-specfile (but then, I have to figure out how not to expand system-defined macros). -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #3 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Sorry, it seems I confused description with a summary, so correct one: While primarily aimed at (CMAN,rgmanager)-(Corosync/CMAN,Pacemaker) cluster stacks configuration conversion (as per RHEL trend), the command-filter-format framework (capable of XSLT) offers also other uses through its plugin library. -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #2 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Some other packaging tweaks, added man page for CLI frontend: http://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.4-1.fc21.src.rpm -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1182358 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182358 [Bug 1182358] New package request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats -- 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 1180723] Review Request: clufter - Tool for transforming/analyzing cluster configuration formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180723 --- Comment #1 from Jan Pokorný jpoko...@redhat.com --- Restructured a bit, updated SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/jpokorny/pkgs/clufter/review/clufter-0.3.3_git.9240dfc-1.fc21.src.rpm -- 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
