[Bug 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602279 --- Comment #28 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602279 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602279 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602279 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added CC||limburg...@gmail.com --- Comment #27 from Jon Ciesla --- Package Change Request == Package Name: LibRaw New Branches: epel7 Owners: limb -- 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System 2010-07-15 17:06:55 EDT --- LibRaw-0.9.1-8.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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||LibRaw-0.9.1-8.fc13 Resolution||ERRATA -- 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System 2010-07-13 03:50:03 EDT --- LibRaw-0.9.1-8.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 LibRaw'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/LibRaw-0.9.1-8.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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System 2010-07-09 15:45:59 EDT --- LibRaw-0.9.1-8.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/LibRaw-0.9.1-8.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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #23 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-07-09 14:17:05 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #21 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-07-08 07:05:49 EDT --- Thanks, will request cvs module now. -- 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Siddhesh Poyarekar changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-07-08 07:07:02 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: LibRaw Short Description: Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras Owners: siddhesh Branches: F-13 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
Chen Lei changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #20 from Chen Lei 2010-07-08 05:16:05 EDT
---
formal review here:
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing
MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [FIXME?: covers this
list and more]
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[=] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
<>51931411fb4e060effe78420e754312c
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
[+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Okay, this package is approved, you can remove LICENSE.LibRaw.pdf from %doc
before importing LibRaw to 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Chen Lei changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|supercyp...@gmail.com -- 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #19 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-07-07 10:42:38 EDT --- Got a response for the query to legal-list: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2010-July/001319.html I've modified the spec to now include GPLv2 or CDDL based on the above. Also removed buildroot stuff as mentioned in comment 17. Updated spec and srpm: http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-7/LibRaw.spec http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-7/LibRaw-0.9.1-7.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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #18 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-07-05
02:12:53 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> OK, if you intend to package for Fedora, you can remove BuildRoot:
> %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root and rm -rf %{buildroot} as
> well.
Ok thanks, I'll do this in the next revision once the license details are
sorted out..
> LGPLv2.1 is not enough for LibRaw.
> See
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Dual_Licensing_Scenarios
>
Thanks for clarifying. I've sent an email to legal list asking for direction on
this:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2010-July/001313.html
--
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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #17 from Chen Lei 2010-07-04 22:53:13 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #15)
> Updated:
>
> http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-6/LibRaw.spec
> http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-6/LibRaw-0.9.1-6.fc14.src.rpm
>
> (In reply to comment #13)
>
> > 2. rpmlint LibRaw-0.9.1-5.fc14.src.rpm
> > LibRaw.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dcraw -> draw, craw, d
> > craw
> > LibRaw.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
> > LibRaw.src: W: no-%clean-section
> > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
> >
> > %clean-section is still needed for F12 and below.
>
> I intend to package for F-13 or later, so I followed the suggestion in comment
> 2
OK, if you intend to package for Fedora, you can remove BuildRoot:
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root and rm -rf %{buildroot} as well.
> > 6. License: LGPLv2+ with exceptions
> > Please explain why you use this license for LibRaw.
> > From website, I see the license is LGPLv2+ or CDDL or LibRaw
> >
> > Please try to contact fedora-legal to add LibRaw license for fedora
> >
> > See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Software_License_List
>
> Fixed this to LGPLv2. I had misread the license table in
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
>
> The library is distributed under all those licenses, but the website also
> mentions that "You may choose license you like more from these three.". I
> chose
> to go with LGPLv2.1 as a result.
LGPLv2.1 is not enough for LibRaw.
See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Dual_Licensing_Scenarios
--
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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #16 from Chen Lei 2010-07-04 22:43:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > fwiw, 1. is mostly harmless, the last flag wins, so -O4 -O2 ends up -O2 Thanks for clarification :), since shotwell 0.6.1 is released, I'll review 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Chen Lei changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #15 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-07-04
01:05:20 EDT ---
Updated:
http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-6/LibRaw.spec
http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-6/LibRaw-0.9.1-6.fc14.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #13)
> 1.For rpmbuild log:
> g++ -DLIBRAW_NOTHREADS -O4 -I. -w -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
> -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic
> -o
> bin/4channels samples/4channels.cpp -L./lib -lraw -lm
>
>
> Please remove -O4 and -w from CFLAGS.
Fixed.
> 2. rpmlint LibRaw-0.9.1-5.fc14.src.rpm
> LibRaw.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dcraw -> draw, craw, d
> craw
> LibRaw.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
> LibRaw.src: W: no-%clean-section
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
>
> %clean-section is still needed for F12 and below.
I intend to package for F-13 or later, so I followed the suggestion in comment
2
> 3. Patch name:
>
> It'll be better to add %{name}-%{version} into patch name.
>
> e.g.
> Patch0: LibRaw-0.9.1-configure.patch
>
> Patch1: LibRaw-0.9.1-configure-optflags.patch
>
I've fixed this to add %{name} and hard-coded the version number (0.9.1) since
I expect to be using this patch across releases and want to avoid renaming
patches on rebase. Upstream acknowledged receipt of the patch but has not
reverted with comments on whether it will be included in the next release.
> 4. Group: Amusements/Graphics -> Development/Libraries
>
Fixed.
> 5.%setup -q -n %{name}-%{version} can be shorted to %setup -q
Fixed
> 6. License: LGPLv2+ with exceptions
> Please explain why you use this license for LibRaw.
> From website, I see the license is LGPLv2+ or CDDL or LibRaw
>
> Please try to contact fedora-legal to add LibRaw license for fedora
>
> See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Software_License_List
Fixed this to LGPLv2. I had misread the license table in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
The library is distributed under all those licenses, but the website also
mentions that "You may choose license you like more from these three.". I chose
to go with LGPLv2.1 as a result.
--
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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #14 from Rex Dieter 2010-07-03 13:09:58 EDT --- fwiw, 1. is mostly harmless, the last flag wins, so -O4 -O2 ends up -O2 -- 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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #13 from Chen Lei 2010-07-03 13:05:50 EDT
---
1.For rpmbuild log:
g++ -DLIBRAW_NOTHREADS -O4 -I. -w -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -o
bin/4channels samples/4channels.cpp -L./lib -lraw -lm
Please remove -O4 and -w from CFLAGS.
2. rpmlint LibRaw-0.9.1-5.fc14.src.rpm
LibRaw.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dcraw -> draw, craw, d craw
LibRaw.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
LibRaw.src: W: no-%clean-section
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
%clean-section is still needed for F12 and below.
3. Patch name:
It'll be better to add %{name}-%{version} into patch name.
e.g.
Patch0: LibRaw-0.9.1-configure.patch
Patch1: LibRaw-0.9.1-configure-optflags.patch
4. Group: Amusements/Graphics -> Development/Libraries
5.%setup -q -n %{name}-%{version} can be shorted to %setup -q
6. License: LGPLv2+ with exceptions
Please explain why you use this license for LibRaw.
>From website, I see the license is LGPLv2+ or CDDL or LibRaw
Please try to contact fedora-legal to add LibRaw license for fedora
See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Software_License_List
--
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 602279] Review Request: LibRaw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Siddhesh Poyarekar changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: libraw -|Review Request: LibRaw - |Library for reading RAW |Library for reading RAW |files obtained from digital |files obtained from digital |photo cameras |photo cameras -- 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #12 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-06-30 01:23:29 EDT --- Thanks, updated SPEC and SRPM based on feedback in comment 10 and comment 11: http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-5/LibRaw.spec http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-5/LibRaw-0.9.1-5.fc14.src.rpm * Cleaned up the doc installation to use %doc * Use optflags -- 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #11 from Chen Lei 2010-06-29 05:36:43 EDT
---
The current SRPM don't honor %{optflags} correctly, this should be fixed.
>From rpmbuild log:
g++ -c -DLIBRAW_NOTHREADS -O4 -I. -w -o object/dcraw_fileio.o
internal/dcraw_fileio.cpp
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
--
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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #10 from Chen Lei 2010-06-29 05:24:37 EDT
---
>
> > - the way you handle the docs is wierd. Typically, these are just included
> > in
> > the file list without installing them in the tree, which makes them show
> > up
> > in %{_docdir} automatically.
>
> The reason I'm manually copying files over rather than using the %doc is that
> I
> want to build a directory tree under the doc dir to separate the manual files
> (*.html, *.png) from the license files. I also intend to include the sample
> program source code in the future.
>
> I referred a document that told me to avoid the %doc directive if I'm going to
> install a directory tree under the docdir. Unfortunately I cannot find the
> document anymore :(
>
You can still use %doc.
%install
cp -pr doc manual
%file devel
%doc LICENSE.CDDL LICENSE.LibRaw.pdf LICENSE.LGPL COPYRIGHT Changelog.txt
Changelog.rus
%doc manual sample
See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#With_.25doc
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#Examples
--
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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #9 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-06-29 04:38:57 EDT --- Thanks. Updated SPEC and SRPM based on feedback in comment 8. The SPEC file name is also changed as a result. http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-4/LibRaw.spec http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/LibRaw/0.9.1-4/LibRaw-0.9.1-4.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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #8 from Ralf Corsepius 2010-06-29 03:48:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > My original intention to name this libraw instead of LibRaw was to maintain > consistency with other libraries being named lib* instead of Lib*. But I guess > I pretty much invented my own packaging guideline there. Correct, your package naming does not comply to the FPG. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming > > says that it should match the upstream tarball name, but also that I should > maintain consistency with other distributions if it has already been packaged > elsewhere. The Debian one is already out: You are misreading the FPB. Debian is irrelevant. Their naming is lower case only and in general is entirely different from Fedora's. > http://packages.debian.org/unstable/main/libraw-dev Note: libraw-dev - Entirely different from Fedora. > Do I still go ahead and try to match the upstream name? Yes, I consider this to be a MUST FIX. If you really want to support "libraw-*" you can add artificial Provides:. But be warned: There are reasons why we use "the tarballs' name". You find yourselves in trouble should some other project release "libraw" 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #7 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-06-29 03:26:18 EDT --- My original intention to name this libraw instead of LibRaw was to maintain consistency with other libraries being named lib* instead of Lib*. But I guess I pretty much invented my own packaging guideline there. But now this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming says that it should match the upstream tarball name, but also that I should maintain consistency with other distributions if it has already been packaged elsewhere. The Debian one is already out: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/main/libraw-dev Do I still go ahead and try to match the upstream name? -- 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Ralf Corsepius changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #6 from Ralf Corsepius 2010-06-29 02:06:38 EDT --- You spec contains this: %global upstream_name LibRaw It's Fedora convention to name packages strictly after the name upstream uses for their tarballs. => This package needs to be named LibRaw. -- 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #5 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-06-29 01:31:17 EDT --- Updated spec and srpm: http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/libraw/0.9.1-3/libraw.spec http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/libraw/0.9.1-3/libraw-0.9.1-3.fc14.src.rpm Changes: * Removed %clean section as per suggestion in comment 2 * Updated the doc installation to use %defaultdocdir instead of %docdir. The doc installation process is still the same weird one since I found the link I was referring to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#.25files_prefixes -- 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
--- Comment #4 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-06-21
09:44:21 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Some preliminary comments:
>
> - rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install is no longer required
>
> - %clean is not required anymore either
Thanks, I'll make this change.
> - the way you handle the docs is wierd. Typically, these are just included in
> the file list without installing them in the tree, which makes them show up
> in %{_docdir} automatically.
The reason I'm manually copying files over rather than using the %doc is that I
want to build a directory tree under the doc dir to separate the manual files
(*.html, *.png) from the license files. I also intend to include the sample
program source code in the future.
I referred a document that told me to avoid the %doc directive if I'm going to
install a directory tree under the docdir. Unfortunately I cannot find the
document anymore :(
(In reply to comment #3)
> Refer to the lastest guideline:
> When a package only provides static libraries you can place all the static
> library files in the *-devel subpackage. When doing this you also must have a
> virtual Provide for the *-static package
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries_2
>
That is exactly what I have tried to do. The libraw package does not get built
at all since it does not have any files in it, so the only output from the
build is a libraw-devel, which also provides libraw-static. Am I missing
something in 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 Chen Lei changed: What|Removed |Added CC||supercyp...@gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Chen Lei 2010-06-21 08:41:12 EDT --- Refer to the lastest guideline: When a package only provides static libraries you can place all the static library files in the *-devel subpackage. When doing this you also must have a virtual Provide for the *-static package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries_2 -- 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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279
Matthias Clasen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mcla...@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Clasen 2010-06-19 11:58:27
EDT ---
Some preliminary comments:
- rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install is no longer required
- %clean is not required anymore either
- the way you handle the docs is wierd. Typically, these are just included in
the file list without installing them in the tree, which makes them show up
in %{_docdir} automatically.
--
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 602279] Review Request: libraw - Library for reading RAW files obtained from digital photo cameras
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=602279 --- Comment #1 from Siddhesh Poyarekar 2010-06-10 07:41:10 EDT --- Modified build to disable lcms and openmp support. Upstream does not enable them by default and this can break applications building against libraw, since they need extra linker flags then. Updated spec and srpm: http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/libraw/0.9.1-2/libraw.spec http://siddhesh.fedorapeople.org/libraw/0.9.1-2/libraw-0.9.1-2.fc14.src.rpm And a correction to the above comment: shotwell git trunk (future 0.6 release) requires libraw, not the 0.5 release. -- 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
