[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 Andrey Ponomarenko andrei.mos...@mail.ru changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrei.mos...@mail.ru --- Comment #18 from Andrey Ponomarenko andrei.mos...@mail.ru --- See results of abi-compliance-checker here: http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/jsoncpp.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ijM6QlM4Goa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #19 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com --- Hello Michael, Sebastien and Andrey, Thanks for your hard work and contributions to this package. I'm very happy that jsoncpp was finally approved, even if the lack of soname support from upstream could bring some problems later on. Hopefully the link from Andrey will be useful to spot them before pushing any updates. Best, Mario -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DryyD61qMZa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #17 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- JFYI, a comparison with spot's package: 3 symbols removed $ rpmsodiff ./jsoncpp/0.6.0-0.1.20120626svn249.fc18/x86_64/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.1.20120626svn249.fc18.x86_64.rpm ./jsoncpp/0.6.0-0.8.rc2.fc18/x86_64/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.8.rc2.fc18.x86_64.rpm common sonames: libjsoncpp.so.0/usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 --- jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.1.20120626svn249.fc18/libjsoncpp.so.02013-03-05 12:02:39.785966992 +0100 +++ jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.8.rc2.fc18/libjsoncpp.so.02013-03-04 23:09:38.398183855 +0100 @@ -1,3 +1,2 @@ _ZN4Json10FastWriter10writeValueERKNS_5ValueET -_ZN4Json10FastWriter20dropNullPlaceholdersEvT _ZN4Json10FastWriter23enableYAMLCompatibilityEvT @@ -227,3 +226,2 @@ _ZNK4Json5Value7isArrayEvT -_ZNK4Json5Value7isInt64EvT _ZNK4Json5Value8CZString14isStaticStringEvT @@ -241,3 +239,2 @@ _ZNK4Json5Value8isStringEvT -_ZNK4Json5Value8isUInt64EvT _ZNK4Json5Value9asCStringEvT 3 symbols removed T _ZN4Json10FastWriter20dropNullPlaceholdersEv T _ZNK4Json5Value7isInt64Ev T _ZNK4Json5Value8isUInt64Ev vim:ft=diff -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=M6I5s7mETXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #15 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com --- Thanks Sebastien, I'm curious if Michael sees any additional problems or if the package can be approved (and used to build orthanc :) ) Best, Mario -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=D7BDdxNn35a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mschwe...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- Hmmm, with regard to the shared library this is sort of a grey area. We don't have anything in the packaging guidelines that comments on making up versioned SONAMEs. I can only repeat comment 8 and approve this package with a big fat warning only. You will need to take the full risk and the full responsibility for shipping a libjsoncpp.so.0 that may be incompatible with a future upstream release, other distributions, or even updates of jsoncpp within Fedora. The automatic RPM SONAME dependencies won't help you either within the Fedora package collection. You'll be on your own here, and you'll need to be very careful and check the API/ABI of future updates with the help of tools like diff, rpmsodiff and abi-compliance-checker, for example. If the ABI breaks often, it would be better to use a stricter SONAME version, but with the added penalty that you would need to invent a suitable versioning scheme or rebuild dependencies more often than necessary. As a last resort, you could continue building a shared lib, but with a SONAME that would change [almost] always. It's also less than ideal that upstream has not responded to the ticket and/or forum thread which you've opened. In case of doubts, it might also be an idea to consult the Fedora packaging mailing-list for feedback on this. And, of course, this is an opportunity to team up with the Orthanc packagers and have more people check/co-maintain future jsoncpp updates/upgrades. Upstream does not provide a soname, so I use 0.0.0. See comment 6. libjsoncpp.so.0 $ eu-readelf -d /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 |grep SO SONAMELibrary soname: [libjsoncpp.so.0] # Build the doc python doxybuild.py Python is only available indirectly because of Scons. There are two minor packaging issues left, which shouldn't block the package, however: * jsoncpp.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/jsoncpp-0.6.0/AUTHORS * jsoncpp-doc : /usr/share/doc/jsoncpp/index.html links a few local files, which are only packaged in the base jsoncpp package %doc dir. E.g. LICENSE, *.txt. Those links give 404 not found, of course. Duplicating those %doc files in the -doc package would be acceptable here, IMO. Making jsoncpp-doc depend on the base package would not be good, because Documentation packages usually should stay independent. Summary:An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++ And last but not least, now that I've had another look at the spec, I'm not a fan of leading articles at the beginning of the Summary. When those summaries are displayed by Anaconda and package tools, that looks ugly if many of them start with An, A, The. Nowadays most packages drop leading articles, I think. Also, mentioning that this is a library or API might be better. Mentioning that reading and writing is implemented might be too much, because a future version might also offer checking/validating. It's okay if the description expands on such details. Summary: JSON API for C++ Summary: JSON library implemented in C++ Summary: C++ library for reading and writing JSON Up to you, of course. ;) APPROVED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CRMvoSKLHPa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||678809 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ERF6lVr8YOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #14 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp.spec SRPM URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.8.rc2.fc18.src.rpm fedora review complains of: [!]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 384 bytes in 293 files. The subpackage was there in the beginning, but I removed it because I thought it was useless. I created it again in this release. jsoncpp.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 Weird, I don't have this warning. /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 ^^ maybe the soname here is not set correctly? Upstream does not provide a soname, so I use 0.0.0. See comment 6. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WhtoIfp4LVa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #12 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com --- Hi! It seems that the package is in a good shape. Any plans to finish it soon? We would like to use it in the review of orthanc. fedora review complains of: [!]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 384 bytes in 293 files. jsoncpp.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 jsoncpp.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/jsoncpp-0.6.0/AUTHORS Best, Mario -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=BBTqkLIf5aa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #13 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com --- Woops, I forgot: /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 ^^ maybe the soname here is not set correctly? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Gr48cQkr5ia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #10 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- Debian's libjsoncpp_0.6.0~rc2-3.debian.tar.gz file ./patches/fix-SConstruct-soname.patch does set a soname: $ grep soname fix-SConstruct-soname.patch +env.Append( LINKFLAGS='-Wl,-soname,libjsoncpp.so.0') There are several sh: dot: command not found errors in the build output, referring to a missing BuildRequires: graphviz $ rpmlint * jsoncpp.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 jsoncpp.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/jsoncpp- 0.6.0/AUTHORS 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=v2Jk6w1TIAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #11 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp.spec SRPM URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.7.rc2.fc18.src.rpm Actually, a library with a soname was generated but I still installed the old library without a soname. Again, this is because I pasted a line without reading it very carefully. I now install the right lib with a soname. Is it OK like that or do I have to use the patch? I also added the missing BuildRequires. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=bsDOjK1edSa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #6 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com --- Thanks for all your comments. I opened a bug on the project's bugtracker for the missing soname: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3598140group_id=16atid=758826 I also started a topic about the fedora package: https://sourceforge.net/projects/jsoncpp/forums/forum/483465/topic/6513123 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fPtaf9Re0xa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #7 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com --- I also posted a similar bug two months ago, but without any reply: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3577800group_id=16atid=758826 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GJ3tt6bPuLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617
--- Comment #8 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
jsoncpp.pc :
Cflags: -I${includedir} -I${includedir}/jsoncpp/
The first -I${includedir} should be dropped. It makes no sense, because gcc
would ignore it anyway -- and pkg-config drops it, too. ;)
jsoncpp.x86_64 :
rpmls jsoncpp|less
This base package includes documentation for developers, which should be moved
into the -devel package.
The package includes only
-rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0
which is odd, because where is libjsoncpp.so.0?
jsoncpp.spec :
%check
scons platform=linux-gcc check %{?_smp_mflags}
# Now, lets make a proper shared lib. :P
g++ -o libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 -shared -Wl,-soname,libjsoncpp.so.0
buildscons/linux-gcc-*/src/lib_json/*.os -lpthread
I haven't reread the entire spec file, only stumbled into this.
The %check section is the entirely wrong place where to build the shared lib.
%check is processed _after_ %install, and it does not (and must not) install
any files into the %buildroot either.
Notice also that here it adds a SONAME, starting with libjsoncpp.so.0 which is
rude and dangerous. Upstream really ought to be involved here. How is this
handled in the Debian package, which is said to create a shared lib, too?
* Just interesting is this upstream bug tracker ticket:
File name conflict
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3420553group_id=16atid=758826
Someone points out a previous conflict between jsoncpp and json-c:
$ repoquery --whatprovides /usr/include/json/json.h
json-c-devel-0:0.10-2.fc18.i686
json-c-devel-0:0.10-2.fc18.x86_64
json-c-devel-0:0.10-2.fc18.i686
json-c-devel-0:0.10-2.fc18.x86_64
For current jsoncpp, the file is stored in another subdir:
/usr/include/jsoncpp/json/json.h
This is a good example about how easy it is to create conflicts and that it's
good to watch out for potential conflicts during review:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts#Potential_Conflicting_Files
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts#Header_Name_Conflicts
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=IawsNGAguya=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #9 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp.spec SRPM URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.5.rc2.fc18.src.rpm Well, it seems that I'm bad at copy/pasting :( The debian package don't seem to do any additional build, and copy the lib to /usr/lib/libjsoncpp.so.0.6.0. See http://packages-powell.debian.org/en/wheezy/armhf/libs/libjsoncpp0 Yes, I was aware of the potential conflict with json-c -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pP9Mo2VSm9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #4 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp.spec SRPm URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.4.rc2.fc18.src.rpm It seems that spot already packaged jsoncpp for the chromium repository: http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/spot/chromium/fedora-18/SRPMS/ I shamelessly copy/pasted parts of his spec file, to build a proper shared library and to add a pkg-config file. I think I fixed all the issues. Note that I removed the static and the doc subpackages (the doc is not that big after all) And I forgot to post rpmlint's output last time: `-- rpmlint jsoncpp-* jsoncpp.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 jsoncpp.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/jsoncpp-0.6.0/AUTHORS jsoncpp-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8ryQ6Ebmeza=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- No review of that yet, just this: jsoncpp.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libjsoncpp.so.0.0.0 That's dangerous. It's good that Tom did not make up an arbitrary SONAME just to please rpmlint. jsoncpp upstream ought to be involved in decising what SONAME to start with and when, so API/ABI changes are reflected properly in the versioned SONAME. However, no-soname means that there will be no automatic RPM dependency on the right SONAME, but just a weak dependency on the library name. Dependencies, such as Orthanc, could only make that more strict by requiring a specific %version-%release of the jsoncpp package, but updating jsoncpp would require all such dependencies to be rebuilt. Even if one would require a specific jsoncpp %version only (any %release), this could get dangerous, since the Fedora package versioning scheme for pre-/post-releases and snapshots keeps %version constant while the shipped source code may change heavily. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=oZZOm7bfWAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mrcer...@gmail.com Blocks||888301 (orthanc) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FDxePMsCYua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #3 from Mario Ceresa mrcer...@gmail.com --- Thanks for packaging jsoncpp! We depend on you to pursue this other review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888301 Please keep on the good work! Best, Mario -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=J2Ms7eE0qKa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617
Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mschwe...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Name: jsoncpp
Group:Development/Libraries
As long as we still fill in the Group Tag, library base packages still enter
group System Environment/Libraries. Group Development/Libraries is not for
the run-time libs but e.g. -devel packages.
%package devel
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
Requires: pkgconfig
There is an automatic dependency for a long time.
%package static
Summary: Static libraries for %{name}
What's the reason you don't adhere to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
?
sed 's/CCFLAGS = -Wall/CCFLAGS = %{optflags}/' -i SConstruct
As convenient as sed (or Perl) substitutions like this may be, a common mistake
is to forget adding a guard. You want to ensure that this expression still
matches. Or else it might not apply anymore and you would not apply %optflags
then. For example, add a corresponding grep command that makes the rpmbuild
exit when the 'CCFLAGS = -Wall' is not found anymore and could not be
substituted.
%check
scons platform=linux-gcc check %{?_smp_mflags}
Good! It's always a pleasure to stumble into new packages where the packager
uses %check to run available test-suites.
%install
install -m 0644 include/json/*.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/%{name}/json
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps
Even if several of the installed files may be fresh builds.
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.%{src_release}
Have you done a test-build already?
What is the library SONAME and its version?
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.a.%{src_release}
Odd. So, with this file name you would link it via its full path instead of
just -ljsoncpp?
%{_includedir}/%{name}
The more readable form for directories is the one with a trailing slash:
%{_includedir}/%{name}/
Not so important for an include dir like this but more readable in general and
more explicit where a file entry could also refer to a single file only.
%files
%doc AUTHORS LICENSE NEWS.txt README.txt
%files static
%doc AUTHORS LICENSE NEWS.txt README.txt
%files devel
%doc AUTHORS LICENSE NEWS.txt README.txt
%files doc
%doc AUTHORS LICENSE NEWS.txt README.txt
Even if storage space is cheap, these files are duplicated in too many places.
Please revisit
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplicate_Files
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=jhg6Q59uesa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 882617] Review Request: jsoncpp - An implementation of a JSON reader and writer in C++
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=882617 --- Comment #1 from Sébastien Willmann sebastien.willm...@gmail.com --- Changed license field to Public Domain or MIT Spec URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp.spec SRPm URL: http://wilqu.fedorapeople.org/reviews/jsoncpp/jsoncpp-0.6.0-0.2.rc2.fc17.src.rpm -- 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
