[Bug 598902] Review Request: pxz - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902 Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2010-06-08 04:32:34 EDT --- Jussi, Kevin, thanks for cooperation :) -- 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 598902] Review Request: pxz - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902 Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: PXZ - |Review Request: pxz - |Parallel LZMA compressor|Parallel LZMA compressor |compatible with XZ |compatible with XZ --- Comment #7 from Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2010-06-08 01:30:01 EDT --- Done, thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598902] Review Request: PXZ - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902 Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2010-06-06 01:54:01 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pxz Short Description: Parallel LZMA compressor using XZ Owners: jnovy Branches: F-12 F-13 EL-6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598902] Review Request: PXZ - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2010-06-03 08:20:27 EDT --- Assigning. -- 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 598902] Review Request: PXZ - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2010-06-03 08:28:58
EDT ---
rpmlint output:
pxz.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.999.9-0.1.20100526.beta
['4.999.9-0.1.beta.20100602git.fc13', '4.999.9-0.1.beta.20100602git']
pxz.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pxz
pxz-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
The error is caused by optflags not being used:
gcc -Wall -Wshadow -Wcast-align -Winline -Wextra -Wmissing-noreturn
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -DPXZ_BUILD_DATE=\`date +%Y%m%d`\
-DPXZ_VERSION=\4.999.9beta\ -O2 -fopenmp -llzma pxz.c -o pxz
Change
CFLAGS=%{optflags}
to
export CFLAGS=%{optflags}
and it works.
However, I recommend patching out
CFLAGS+=-O2 -fopenmp
from the makefile, and using
export CFLAGS=%{optflags} -fopenmp
instead.
The man page warning can be omitted. Although, I see you are also upstream, so
I'd recommend you create a man page.
MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate. OK
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
NEEDSWORK
- License is GPLv2+, not LGPLv2+.
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSWORK
- See above.
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. NEEDSWORK
- See above.
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
--
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 598902] Review Request: PXZ - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902 --- Comment #3 from Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2010-06-03 10:52:44 EDT --- Thanks! All of the mentioned fixes should be addressed now. http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/pxz/pxz.spec http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/pxz/pxz-4.999.9-0.1.beta.20100603git.fc13.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 598902] Review Request: PXZ - Parallel LZMA compressor compatible with XZ
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=598902
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2010-06-03 14:49:18
EDT ---
This is a package review, not a merge review ;)
$ rpmlint pxz-*
pxz.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.999.9-0.1.20100603.beta
['4.999.9-0.1.beta.20100603git.fc13', '4.999.9-0.1.beta.20100603git']
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
so the change log EVR entries should be of the style
4.999.9-0.1.beta.20100603git
not
4.999.9-0.1.20100603.beta
- I abhor wildcards where they are not needed. Please change
%{_mandir}/man1/*.1*
to
%{_mandir}/man1/pxz.1*
- Please change URL to
http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/pxz
as that's a *lot* easier to paste from the spec file.
Otherwise, my earlier comments seem to have been taken into account. One final
comment: now the compilation does not use the -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE flags. Are these not necessary on Fedora?
The final changes are cosmetic, so you can consider this package
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
