[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877 --- Comment #54 from Tim Fenn --- Package Change Request == Package Name: CBFlib New Branches: epel7 Owners: timfenn InitialCC: timfenn -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877 Tim Fenn changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877 --- Comment #55 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: 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 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #37 from Jussi Lehtola 2011-12-16 05:13:04 EST --- ping Dmitrij? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #38 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2011-12-18 22:40:54 EST --- Pong. Sorry, my bad. Somehow missed comment 36. I'm 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877
--- Comment #39 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2011-12-21 23:44:26
EST ---
1) Are you sure that doc is under GPL2 (%files section, -devel)?
2) Two adscimg2cbf in %files
3) You still wants utils (which are from examples btw) in main CBF_lib_ package
but not to do CBFlib-utils subpackage. Just tell me you realy insist on it.
4) cbf.c contain two exit calls (both are memory allocation error) that going
to shared library. Could it be easy handled? I suppose "no" but still. It is
not a blocker.
5) Typo in %changelog: first string contain "0.9.2.1-1" but not "0.9.2.2-1".
6) Please use %{optflags} and %{buildroot}.
7) gpl.txt is to be in doc dir. Do not move it, you could copy it if you want
it in root. (%doc doc/gpl.txt will work)
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877
--- Comment #40 from Tim Fenn 2011-12-30 18:56:34 EST ---
Sorry for my late reply, holidays and what not.
(In reply to comment #39)
> 1) Are you sure that doc is under GPL2 (%files section, -devel)?
Yes - this was discussed with upstream in Sept. 2009 (!) - all the API calls
are LGPLv2+, all else is GPLv2+.
> 2) Two adscimg2cbf in %files
fixed
> 3) You still wants utils (which are from examples btw) in main CBF_lib_
> package
> but not to do CBFlib-utils subpackage. Just tell me you realy insist on it.
see comments 12-16 (unless something changed recently?)
> 4) cbf.c contain two exit calls (both are memory allocation error) that going
> to shared library. Could it be easy handled? I suppose "no" but still. It is
> not a blocker.
I'll mention this to upstream and suggest some ideas and try to get this
handled by the author(s).
> 5) Typo in %changelog: first string contain "0.9.2.1-1" but not "0.9.2.2-1".
fixed
> 6) Please use %{optflags} and %{buildroot}.
done
> 7) gpl.txt is to be in doc dir. Do not move it, you could copy it if you want
> it in root. (%doc doc/gpl.txt will work)
fixed
http://sites.google.com/site/timfenn/CBFlib.spec
http://sites.google.com/site/timfenn/CBFlib-0.9.2.3-1.fc16.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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877
--- Comment #41 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2012-01-23 04:56:39
EST ---
(-) rpmlint output:
CBFlib-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/CBFlib-0.9.2.3/examples/cbf2adscimg.c
CBFlib-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/CBFlib-0.9.2.3/examples/cbf2adscimg_sub.c
Need to fix permissions.
(+) Name ok.
(+) Spec ok.
(+) The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
(+) License ok.
(+) Sources are matched upstream ones.
(+) The package was compiled on at least on x86_64, ok.
(+) Package post (un)install scrips call ldconfig.
(+) Package owns its directories, not owns others.
(+) %files section ok
(-) Permissions are not set properly.
Fix permissions for debuginfo package.
(+/-) Devel package contain all needed .so and headers, it has Requires:
%{name} = %{version}-%{release} string.
Goudelines ask "Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}".
Fix that isues - and I'l close 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877
--- Comment #42 from Tim Fenn 2012-01-29 23:12:19 EST ---
(In reply to comment #41)
> (-) rpmlint output:
> CBFlib-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> /usr/src/debug/CBFlib-0.9.2.3/examples/cbf2adscimg.c
> CBFlib-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
> /usr/src/debug/CBFlib-0.9.2.3/examples/cbf2adscimg_sub.c
>
> Need to fix permissions.
>
Fixed.
>
> (+/-) Devel package contain all needed .so and headers, it has Requires:
> %{name} = %{version}-%{release} string.
>
> Goudelines ask "Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}".
>
> Fix that isues - and I'l close review.
Done.
http://sites.google.com/site/timfenn/CBFlib.spec
http://sites.google.com/site/timfenn/CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc16.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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #43 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2012-01-29 23:56:30 EST --- Ok. Aproved, -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Tim Fenn changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #44 from Tim Fenn 2012-01-31 22:26:57 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: CBFlib Short Description: crystallography binary format library Owners: timfenn Branches: f15 f16 el6 InitialCC: timfenn -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #45 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-01 08:21:11 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #47 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-04 17:15:40 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc15 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #46 from Tim Fenn 2012-02-04 17:13:08 EST --- git done, packages tagged/built for f15/f16/el6/rawhide. OK to close? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #49 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-04 17:16:00 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc16 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #48 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-04 17:15:51 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.el6 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #50 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-05 14:31:55 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc15 |CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc16 --- Comment #52 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-15 06:30:02 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-15 06:26:41 --- Comment #51 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-15 06:26:41 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.fc16 |CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.el6 --- Comment #53 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-20 14:01:41 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #33 from Tim Fenn 2011-07-05 18:38:31 EDT --- Talked with upstream, pycifrw is no longer required. I've updated the builds here: Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.2.2-1.fc15.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #34 from Takanori MATSUURA 2011-07-06 10:10:28 EDT --- Just for information. My CBFlib package is available from Spec file: http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/mock/CBFlib/CBFlib.spec SRPM file: http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/mock/CBFlib/CBFlib-0.9.2.2-1.fc15.src.rpm The build procedure is based on upstream Makefile with modifications. %check section is now disabled because the process requires modified version of libtiff which has not been upstreamed yet. If you are interested in my spec file, please freely use it. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #35 from Tim Fenn 2011-07-06 16:45:18 EDT --- Takanori, since you're also interested in PyCIFRW, would you like to take the lead on this package? I'd be glad to help co-maintain, if/when it gets through package review. (In reply to comment #34) > Just for information. > My CBFlib package is available from > Spec file: http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/mock/CBFlib/CBFlib.spec > SRPM file: > http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/mock/CBFlib/CBFlib-0.9.2.2-1.fc15.src.rpm > > The build procedure is based on upstream Makefile with modifications. > > %check section is now disabled because the process requires modified version > of > libtiff which has not been upstreamed yet. > > If you are interested in my spec file, please freely use it. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #36 from Tim Fenn 2011-07-11 20:51:23 EDT --- OK, I spoke with Takanori - I'll maintain this package with him as co-maintainer. The build in comment 33 is "review 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kr...@land.ru Status Whiteboard|BuildFails | Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #27 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2010-12-09 08:07:45 EST --- Let me see what I can do with this. Btw, remioved BuildFails as Comment 26 shows it builds. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #28 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich 2010-12-09 08:31:54 EST --- 1. What with License? "GPLv2+ and (GPLv2+ or LGPLv2+)" is rather strange one. May be it should be just "GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+"? 2. For clearity, split "iconv" string into 2, uniting them with "\". 3. Looks like everybody wants it's own copy of md5. Ok. Let it be so. 4. rpmlint claims on shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libcbf.so.0.0.0 e...@glibc_2.2.5 Could it be resolved? 5. +1 to -lib subpackage. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 tjyuviaej changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tjyuviaej+cr...@gmail.com --- Comment #29 from tjyuviaej 2011-01-05 23:04:09 EST --- drel.py is called at the line 8471 in src/cbf.c (line number from 0.9.1.1rc2 tarball). And drel.py (src/drel.py) python script imports CifFile and StarFile which are provided by PyCifRW. I'm afraid that this means CBFlib requires PyCifRW which has a unique license. I have a private package for PyCifRW and can submit it for package preview. However I don't know how to request the assessment of new licenses. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #30 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-06 07:57:46 EST --- You can mail le...@lists.fedoraproject.org with details of the license. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #31 from Tim Fenn 2011-01-07 14:03:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #29) > drel.py is called at the line 8471 in src/cbf.c (line number from 0.9.1.1rc2 > tarball). And drel.py (src/drel.py) python script imports CifFile and StarFile > which are provided by PyCifRW. > > I'm afraid that this means CBFlib requires PyCifRW which has a unique license. > > I have a private package for PyCifRW and can submit it for package preview. > However I don't know how to request the assessment of new licenses. Ah, I hadn't noticed the internal system calls to python - Ugh. OK, this will have to go on hold until the dependence on PyCifRW is removed or we can add it as a dependency. tjyuviaej - let me know if you need assistance submitting/requesting PyCifRW as a package. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #32 from Takanori MATSUURA 2011-01-13 04:24:59 EST --- After the discussion at legal ML, current PyCifRW is not free and not acceptable by Fedora. I'll try to the following approach. * Ask developer of PyCifRW to change license to Fedora-acceptable free one. * Ask developer of CBFlib that he can remove the dependency of PyCifRW. I already prepared PyCifRW package and I can request a package preview if PyCifRW is released with free license. If anyone interests PyCifRW package, please visit my repoview page at http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/install-memo/fedora/ -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #21 from Tim Fenn 2010-07-05 20:16:31 EDT --- Is anyone still reviewing this package? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #22 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-07-06 00:14:01 EDT --- Nobody has ever signed on to do a 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Jussi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #23 from Jussi Lehtola 2010-08-25 01:47:42 EDT --- You're not using $RPM_OPT_FLAGS for the utilities. Did you add the soname yourself? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #24 from Tim Fenn 2010-08-25 23:06:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #23) > You're not using $RPM_OPT_FLAGS for the utilities. > > Did you add the soname yourself? Yes - there is no autoconf/automake support for the package, unfortunately. So I simply assigned an soname of 0. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||BuildFails --- Comment #25 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-03 12:50:22 EDT --- This fails to build for me on rawhide: + gcc convert_image.c -I../include ../src/libcbf.so.0.0.0 -o convert_image /tmp/ccg58RIq.o: In function `main': convert_image.c:(.text+0x1483): warning: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous, better use `mkstemp' /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccg58RIq.o: undefined reference to symbol 'rint@@GLIBC_2.2.5' /usr/bin/ld: note: 'rint@@GLIBC_2.2.5' is defined in DSO /lib64/libm.so.6 so try adding it to the linker command line /lib64/libm.so.6: could not read symbols: Invalid operation collect2: ld returned 1 exit status A scratch build showing the failure: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2574534 Please clear the whiteboard if providing a package which builds. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #26 from Tim Fenn 2010-11-14 22:04:35 EST --- (In reply to comment #25) > > A scratch build showing the failure: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2574534 > > Please clear the whiteboard if providing a package which builds. fixed/updated: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601008 Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.1-1.fc14.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #7 from Chen Lei 2010-03-05 08:49:11 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-03-05 09:53:48 EST --- Who are you pinging? At least click the "Need additional information" box and specify someone. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #9 from Chen Lei 2010-03-05 22:18:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) > Who are you pinging? At least click the "Need additional information" box and > specify someone. Oh sorry, next time I'll be more specfic. I ping Tim - the reporter of this bugzilla. I want to review this package since I'm also a rasmol user. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #10 from Tim Fenn 2010-03-06 17:21:00 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Who are you pinging? At least click the "Need additional information" box > > and > > specify someone. > > Oh sorry, next time I'll be more specfic. I ping Tim - the reporter of this > bugzilla. I want to review this package since I'm also a rasmol user. Feel free to help review and provide suggestions for the package - I'd like to see it officially approved for fedora! -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #11 from Chen Lei 2010-03-08 07:40:59 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #8) > > > Who are you pinging? At least click the "Need additional information" > > > box and > > > specify someone. > > > > Oh sorry, next time I'll be more specfic. I ping Tim - the reporter of this > > bugzilla. I want to review this package since I'm also a rasmol user. > Feel free to help review and provide suggestions for the package - I'd like to > see it officially approved for fedora! I recommand you split out two more subpackages, cbflib-utils and cbflib-doc. See http://packages.debian.org/source/squeeze/cbflib Also cbflib 0.9 now was released already. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #12 from Tim Fenn 2010-03-08 16:42:53 EST --- Here's the updated 0.9.0 version: Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.0-1.fc12.src.rpm I also included some of the bin programs, but I'm wondering if it would be best to prepend "cbf" to them, as names like "convert_image" are a bit ambiguous and potentially conflicting. I didn't split off -doc and -utils, I'd like to get some feedback from fedora review people 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #13 from Chen Lei 2010-03-08 22:39:28 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) > Here's the updated 0.9.0 version: > Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec > SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.0-1.fc12.src.rpm > I also included some of the bin programs, but I'm wondering if it would be > best > to prepend "cbf" to them, as names like "convert_image" are a bit ambiguous > and > potentially conflicting. > I didn't split off -doc and -utils, I'd like to get some feedback from fedora > review people on that. Please do not add utils to main package, it'll lead to multilib conflict. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #14 from Tim Fenn 2010-03-09 21:11:46 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #12) > > Here's the updated 0.9.0 version: > > Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec > > SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.0-1.fc12.src.rpm > > I also included some of the bin programs, but I'm wondering if it would be > > best > > to prepend "cbf" to them, as names like "convert_image" are a bit ambiguous > > and > > potentially conflicting. > > I didn't split off -doc and -utils, I'd like to get some feedback from > > fedora > > review people on that. > > Please do not add utils to main package, it'll lead to multilib conflict. How will it lead to a multilib conflict? Its fine to install both the 32 and 64 bit binaries and libraries and run/use either. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #15 from Chen Lei 2010-03-11 00:58:52 EST --- (In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > > (In reply to comment #12) > > > Here's the updated 0.9.0 version: > > > Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec > > > SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.0-1.fc12.src.rpm > > > I also included some of the bin programs, but I'm wondering if it would > > > be best > > > to prepend "cbf" to them, as names like "convert_image" are a bit > > > ambiguous and > > > potentially conflicting. > > > I didn't split off -doc and -utils, I'd like to get some feedback from > > > fedora > > > review people on that. > > > > Please do not add utils to main package, it'll lead to multilib conflict. > > > How will it lead to a multilib conflict? Its fine to install both the 32 and > 64 > bit binaries and libraries and run/use either. Hi Tim, See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/MultilibTricks#Splitting_libraries_into_separate_packages -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt 2010-03-11 01:13:07 EST --- Take that with a grain of salt, please. It's a draft and not a mandatory item in the guidelines. Ordinary binary executables don't cause multilib conflicts. Tim is right about that. Further, there's a conditional: *If* you have a file conflict in a library package due to other files in the same package, splitting of the libs into their own package *may* help. Doing that doesn't prevent all multiarch problems, though, such as conflicts in the -devel package. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #17 from Chen Lei 2010-03-11 01:39:38 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) > Take that with a grain of salt, please. It's a draft and not a mandatory item > in the guidelines. Ordinary binary executables don't cause multilib conflicts. > Tim is right about that. > Further, there's a conditional: *If* you have a file conflict in a library > package due to other files in the same package, splitting of the libs into > their own package *may* help. Doing that doesn't prevent all multiarch > problems, though, such as conflicts in the -devel package. You are right Michael, this is not a mandatory item in reviewing a package. We should be lenient with multilib conflicts if the package mainly act as a program such as qt-creator. Howerver, the main role of CBFlib is act as a dynamic lib, the programs included in the CBFlib are only utilities. So I think we should be careful with multilib conflicts in CBFlib, it's easy to split out a -utils subpackage. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #18 from Chen Lei 2010-03-11 03:32:36 EST --- I find that CBFlib tarball bundled some external python modules(dREL-ply, PyCifRW, ply), maybe we should remove and package those modules separately. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #19 from Tim Fenn 2010-03-11 21:34:29 EST --- (In reply to comment #18) > I find that CBFlib tarball bundled some external python modules(dREL-ply, > PyCifRW, ply), maybe we should remove and package those modules separately. > I'm not bothering with any of the python stuff with cbflib, and I don't plan to unless there is a strong demand/need for it (which I don't forsee). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
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=523877 --- Comment #20 from Chen Lei 2010-03-11 23:02:57 EST --- (In reply to comment #19) > (In reply to comment #18) > > I find that CBFlib tarball bundled some external python modules(dREL-ply, > > PyCifRW, ply), maybe we should remove and package those modules separately. > > > I'm not bothering with any of the python stuff with cbflib, and I don't plan > to > unless there is a strong demand/need for it (which I don't forsee). OK, but I still recommand you split -doc and -utils subpackage. CBFlib has a lot of documentation in it and both doc and html_graphics dirs need to be included in -doc subpackage. Also, The gpl.txt should not move out of doc dir, grep gpl\.txt CBFlib.html CBFlib.html:YOU MAY REDISTRIBUTE THE CBFLIB PACKAGE UNDER THE TERMS OF THE GPL. grep \.jpg index.html https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
