[Bug 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-15 16:40:31 --- Comment #11 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Package is now marked as stable. -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- Package perl-Coro-6.09-4.fc18, libecb-0.20121008-1.fc18: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing perl-Coro-6.09-4.fc18 libecb-0.20121008-1.fc18' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-16684/libecb-0.20121008-1.fc18,perl-Coro-6.09-4.fc18 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libecb Short Description: Compiler built-ins Owners: ppisar Branches: f18 InitialCC: -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Fixed In Version||libecb-0.20121008-1.fc19 --- Comment #8 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- Thank you for the review and the repository. -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- libecb-0.20121008-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libecb-0.20121008-1.fc18 -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066
Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Increment the release tag, each time you update your submission.
Indeed, although we are in a pre-Git state, bumping the release tag make it
easier to track changes.
Nevertheless, here's the new scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4611546
$ rpmlint -i -v *
libecb.noarch: I: checking
libecb.noarch: E: devel-dependency glibc-headers
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
libecb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US popcount - pop count,
pop-count, upcountry
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libecb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US prefetch - pref etch,
pref-etch, prefect
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libecb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US noinline - no inline,
no-inline, nonlinear
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libecb.noarch: I: checking-url http://software.schmorp.de/pkg/libecb (timeout
10 seconds)
libecb.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/ecb.h
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.
libecb.src: I: checking
libecb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US popcount - pop count,
pop-count, upcountry
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libecb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US prefetch - pref etch,
pref-etch, prefect
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libecb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US noinline - no inline,
no-inline, nonlinear
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
libecb.src: I: checking-url http://software.schmorp.de/pkg/libecb (timeout 10
seconds)
libecb.src: W: invalid-url Source0: libecb-20121008.tar.xz
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
libecb.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: libecb-20121008.tar.xz
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] 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.
BSD
[+] 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. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it
is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
$ sha256sum *
8517f2585a427101f9733a9db84c7a531c2a1b7da12cf1481a68ae8ae2f0ecfa
libecb-20121008.tar.xz
5856d96dcf283c9082870a3d43dcb60ae9f2e6850f615e578e9d6360df280baf
libecb.tar.xz.orig
Common problem for any VCS checkouts.
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[.] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[.]
[Bug 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- You are right. Updates package is on the same address. -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rc040...@freenet.de --- Comment #4 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de --- Increment the release tag, each time you update your submission. -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4588995 $ rpmlint -i -v * libecb.noarch: I: checking libecb.noarch: E: devel-dependency glibc-headers Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself. libecb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US popcount - pop count, pop-count, upcountry The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libecb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US prefetch - pref etch, pref-etch, prefect The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libecb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US noinline - no inline, no-inline, nonlinear The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libecb.noarch: I: checking-url http://software.schmorp.de/pkg/libecb (timeout 10 seconds) libecb.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/ecb.h A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. libecb.src: I: checking libecb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US popcount - pop count, pop-count, upcountry The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libecb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US prefetch - pref etch, pref-etch, prefect The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libecb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US noinline - no inline, no-inline, nonlinear The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. libecb.src: I: checking-url http://software.schmorp.de/pkg/libecb (timeout 10 seconds) libecb.src: W: no-%build-section The spec file does not contain a %build section. Even if some packages don't directly need it, section markers may be overridden in rpm's configuration to provide additional under the hood functionality, such as injection of automatic -debuginfo subpackages. Add the section, even if empty. libecb.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 12, tab: line 2) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. libecb.src: W: invalid-url Source0: libecb-20121008.tar.xz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. libecb.spec: W: no-%build-section The spec file does not contain a %build section. Even if some packages don't directly need it, section markers may be overridden in rpm's configuration to provide additional under the hood functionality, such as injection of automatic -debuginfo subpackages. Add the section, even if empty. libecb.spec:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 12, tab: line 2) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. libecb.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: libecb-20121008.tar.xz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 13 warnings. Some warnings are ignorable. The invalid source is nevertheless valid, because we have a VCS checkout. It *is* a devel package although it doesn't have the -devel suffix, because there are no other files. You just have to fix the missing %build section and the mixed use of spaces and tabs. I recommend spaces, because this way we get the same view in all text editors, regardless of the configured tab width. -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com --- This package will go into F≥18 due to reverse dependencies. -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||863988 -- 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 864066] Review Request: libecb - Compiler built-ins
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864066 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://software.schmorp.de/ ||pkg/libecb -- 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
