[Bug 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Mat Booth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc14 |jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2010-12-15 03:58:28 EST --- jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-13 15:01:32 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System 2010-12-13 15:01:22 EST --- jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2010-12-03 15:42:04 EST --- jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update jnr-posix'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2010-12-02 17:52:54 EST --- jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2010-12-02 17:53:40 EST --- jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc14 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #11 from Jason Tibbitts 2010-12-02 14:33:08 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Mohammed Morsi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Mohammed Morsi 2010-12-02 10:23:48 EST --- Sweet,thx alot. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jnr-posix Short Description: Java Posix layer Owners: mmorsi Branches: f13 f14 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Stanislav Ochotnicky changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-12-02 10:14:02 EST --- Nice, everything is in order now. APPROVED -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #8 from Mohammed Morsi 2010-12-02 09:55:22 EST --- Also changed patch0 to include the "jar.compress=true" fix -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477
--- Comment #7 from Mohammed Morsi 2010-12-02 09:53:59 EST
---
OK thanks for the feedback and srry for the delay (was off all last week).
Updated package to:
1. remove BuildRoot and clean section
2. Consistently use macros
3. jar and javadocs are now named %{name} and not %{name}-%{version}
4. installed pom.xml and used maven macros
As far as the javadoc subpackage, it already depends on the main package, so I
think this isn't an issue (please elaborate if so). Also I'm just going to
leave it as ant for now as thats the quickest way to get this is and is still
standards compliant, we can update the package if this ever becomes an issue.
Updated SPEC and SRPM:
Spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-posix.spec
SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-posix-1.1.4-3.fc13.src.rpm
Again thanks for the 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #6 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-11-19 04:47:28 EST --- Hmm, sorry...actually that warning about non-compressed file is actually valid. nbproject/project.properties contains "jar.compress=false" this has to be changed if you stay with ant. -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477
--- Comment #5 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-11-19
04:27:45 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/jnr-posix-*
jnr-posix.noarch: W: uncompressed-zip /usr/share/java/jnr-posix-1.1.4.jar
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
The warning is from new rpmlint. I'll have to contact rpmlint maintainer to add
filter for jars (no reason to compress them).
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[!] Buildroot definition is not present
Buildroot is no longer necessary for supported Fedoras.
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: CPL or GPLv2+ or LGPLv2+
[x] 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.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: 318e10a1021b53e8513210adf88ad010
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[!] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
%clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} and rm -rf at the beginning of %install
is not needed anymore on supported Fedoraas
[!] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
You mix buildroot macro and RPM_BUILD_ROOT. Pick one
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} directory
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
Through main package. There has been some discussion about having javadoc
depend on main package. My opinion is that javadocs should be independent. They
don't really require main package. I'll leave it up to you, but if you decide
to make it independent, make javadoc require jpackage-utils.
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[!] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
Recent changes in Java packaging guidelines made all %{name}-%{version} things
unwanted. So please install just %{name}.jar (no versioned symlinks). Same goes
for javadoc subdirectory.
[!] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
Source tarball contains pom.xml (working) but you don't install this. Please
install it, and call add_to_maven_depmap with appropriate arguments. This will
make this project usable from other maven projects.
=== Maven ===
[-] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[-] Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[-] Packages have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-utils (for
%update_maven_depmap macro)
^^ when you add maven support look at this to guide you
=== Other suggestions ===
[?] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
Well, I checked and package (with small pom.xml modifications) is buildable
with maven. Since both ways are possible I'd advise to use maven instead of
ant. It's more error prone for
[Bug 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Stanislav Ochotnicky changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||socho...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|socho...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2010-11-18 07:38:08 EST --- I can do the 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 --- Comment #3 from Mohammed Morsi 2010-11-15 13:40:12 EST --- Updated Spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-posix.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-posix-1.1.4-2.fc13.src.rpm $ rpmlint /home/mmorsi/rpmbuild/SRPMS/jnr-posix-1.1.4-2.fc13.src.rpm \ /home/mmorsi/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/jnr-posix-1.1.4-2.fc13.noarch.rpm\ /home/mmorsi/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/jnr-posix-javadoc-1.1.4-2.fc13.noarch.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2602704 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com Bug 561477 depends on bug 561462, which changed state. Bug 561462 Summary: Review Request: jaffl - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561462 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-11-10 17:11:11 EST --- Java packages should ship javadoc subpackages. Please add one. -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Bug 561477 depends on bug 561466, which changed state. Bug 561466 Summary: Review Request: jnr-constants - Java Native Runtime constants https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561466 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA --- Comment #1 from Mohammed Morsi 2010-09-09 16:26:00 EDT --- Updated jnr-posix to current upstream release 1.1.4 Spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-posix.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-posix-1.1.4-1.fc13.src.rpm Unfortunately jruby 1.4.0 (which I submitted to Fedora) doesn't seem to work with this version, whereas jruby 1.5.0, the current upstream stable release, does. I will start looking into updating the submitted jruby package to 1.5.0. Some of its dependencies will most likely also need to be updated, but those should be simpler to do as they are already in 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||561484 -- 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 561477] Review Request: jnr-posix - Java Posix layer
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=561477 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org Depends on||561466, 561462 -- 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
