https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Michal Ambroz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Alias|GNULIB |GNULIB_REVIEW
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #66 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
I'll do SOON ^_^
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #65 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.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Fixed In Version|gnulib-0-4.20131219git.fc20
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #59 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.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #60 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
gnulib-0-4.20131219git.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnulib-0-4.20131219git.fc20
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #61 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org ---
gnulib-0-4.20131219git.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnulib-0-4.20131219git.fc19
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #56 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Thanx Alot Zbigniew, I know how much time you spent for building package and
doing this review, Thank You.
0-4.20131219git
- Update.
- General tweaks.
- Remove META main package.
-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #58 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Thank You ^_^
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: gnulib
Short Description: GNU Portability Library
Owners: moceap zbyszek
Branches: f19 f20
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-cvs?
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #54 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Update:
---
Spec URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SPECS/gnulib.spec
SRPM URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SRPMS/gnulib-0-3.20131201git.oji.fc19.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #53 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
OK. All Done:
--
Spec URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SPECS/gnulib.spec
SRPM URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SRPMS/gnulib-0-2.20131112git.oji.fc19.src.rpm
--
You are
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #46 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
Just a comment on this:
SRPM URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SRPMS/gnulib-0.1.git20131112-1.oji.fc19.src.rpm
It looks very unusual to have git20131112 as part of the %{version}. Since
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #47 from Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #45)
- After more 6 years in 0.0, GnuLib 0.1 released.
- Replace version method to $ver.git$gitdate instead of $gitdate.git$githead.
- Update to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #48 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
Then
Version: 0
Release: X.MMDDgit%{?dist}
would be good enough, since 0.X at the beginning of Release would not make an
important difference.
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Referenced
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #49 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
What about this tag?
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=commit;h=233419c39c6d13d84439b95766328a238ffb6518
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #50 from Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #49)
What about this tag?
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=commit;
h=233419c39c6d13d84439b95766328a238ffb6518
What about it?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #51 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
OK, I read your first comment, but I see if the upstream taged that as 0.1,
then why we defer?
Building take alot of time, so what finally method for last SRPM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #52 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
If the 0.1 is not used anywhere in the code, and if it's true that it is not
some form of release version, then the 0.1 is meaningless for the Fedora RPM
package. All that matters
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #45 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
- After more 6 years in 0.0, GnuLib 0.1 released.
- Replace version method to $ver.git$gitdate instead of $gitdate.git$githead.
- Update to 0.1.git20131112.
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #44 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
Looks fine to me.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #43 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
- Decrease description of git-merge-changelog
- Add license file to git-merge-changelog
Spec URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SPECS/gnulib.spec
SRPM URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #39 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net ---
It means:
BuildArch: noarch at the top of the spec file turns all packages built by the
src.rpm noarch, not only the base package. You cannot override that for
individual
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #40 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Ok Michael, Thank You.
Gnulib isn't arched, but if we want to build modules new subpackage must
arched.
So I create -core subpackage still noarched and contain gnulib, and main
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #41 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
- Update to 20131030.git5c508f6
- Create -core noarch package, because rpmbuild can't drive arched subpackage
from nonarched main one.
- Some General Fixes.
- Add 1st sample form -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #42 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
Looks nice, apart from the %description, which is too long and too detailed.
Maybe something like this:
git-merge-changelog is a git merge driver for changelogs that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #31 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
ok
1. rpmlint: Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gnulib
How to solve ?
2. Note: Macros in: gnulib-docs (description)
Hm, this should be %{name}, not %{gnulib}. I
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #32 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
gnulib-tests is required for building modules, so added to Requires.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #33 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
First Sample :
# Module Sample:
# %package %{module}
# Summary: %{summary_of_module}
# License: %{license_of_module}
#
# %build %{module}
# gnulib-build --create-testdir
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #34 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
* gnulib-build = copy of gnulib-tool before edited :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #35 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
(In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #31)
ok
1. rpmlint: Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gnulib
How to solve ?
C'mon, just add
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #36 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Why not just 'git-merge-changelog'?
Because we working at (gnulib SRPM)
We can use ( Provides ) function.
Then there's the question if additional build requirements are needed.
All
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #37 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
(In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #36)
Why not just 'git-merge-changelog'?
Because we working at (gnulib SRPM)
We can use ( Provides ) function.
The subpackage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #38 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Some problem (I can't solve)
Main package (gnulib) is noarch.
New sub package (git-merge-changelog) arched.
Now I can't build and have this message :
error: line 153: Only
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #27 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Fixes after Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek revision:
- Remove prebuilt java class.
- gnulib-docs require gnulib.
- List all licenses.
- Replace define by global.
Spec URL:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #28 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
Oops, more issues, but they're getting incrementally smaller:
1. rpmlint: Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gnulib
2. Note: Macros in: gnulib-docs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #29 from Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Eric Blake from comment #16)
Although I personally use gnulib in lots of projects, I have never once
wanted to use a distro's packaging of it.
On the other hand, I would
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #30 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
I had no idea about git-merge-changelog. Looks very useful, and I think it
should definitely be packaged in compiled form.
BTW. there's another reason for packaging
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #24 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
Oops, I run fedora-review on this, and there still are issues:
1. Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build
There's lib/javaversion.class, which should be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #25 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
No problem, all will be fixed.
* java-devel is enough
* Can we write (GPL2+) instead of (GPLv2+ and GPLv3 and GPLv3+) ?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #26 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
License names are taken from
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Software_License_List.
There's only GPLvX not GPLX in that list. And GPLv2+ means
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
Created attachment 816430
-- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=816430action=edit
updated spec file
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #21 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
=== packaging ===
I still see some minor issues:
- modules/COPYING should not be removed: it is very important because it gives
a right to use the modules almost freely.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #22 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Mosaab, I'd be happy to co-maintain the package with you,
ME too :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #23 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Updated ::
Spec URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SPECS/gnulib.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ojuba.org/oji/SRPMS/gnulib-20131027.git5191b35-1.oji.fc19.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #18 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
I don't build this package just for it, I need this package to build :
https://bitbucket.org/sortsmill/sortsmill-tools
Sorts Mill uses gnulib-tool at building time.
Sorts Mill
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #19 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de ---
(In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #18)
I don't build this package just for it, I need this package to build :
https://bitbucket.org/sortsmill/sortsmill-tools
Sorts Mill
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rc040...@freenet.de
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
(In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #7)
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #5)
It is nice to be able to use it without bundling in the sources:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #9 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
RE-review ::
1. Done
2. Done
3. Done
4. Done
5. Done
6. Done
7. Done
8. Done
9. Done
10. ??? Explain , make (all) isn't do any thing !
11. Done
12. Done
Ok guys :
I need this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #10 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Spec URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SPECS/gnulib.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ojuba.org/oji/SRPMS/gnulib-20131022.git25fb29a-2.oji.fc19.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #11 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
(In reply to Mosaab Alzoubi from comment #9)
RE-review ::
1. Done
2. Done
The URL should be the content of Source0, not in the comments.
Use:
Source0:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #12 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
2. Done
10. Done
13. Done
14. Done
15. Done
16. Done
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/174
Removed
Building Uploading
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #13 from Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com ---
Spec URL: http://ojuba.org/oji/SPECS/gnulib.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ojuba.org/oji/SRPMS/gnulib-20131022.git25fb29a-3.oji.fc19.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #14 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #8)
(In reply to Ralf Corsepius from comment #7)
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #5)
It is nice to be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebl...@redhat.com,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #16 from Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com ---
Although I personally use gnulib in lots of projects, I have never once wanted
to use a distro's packaging of it. On the other hand, I know that some people
do want it in the distro, if
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cicku...@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
--- Comment #2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ke...@scrye.com
---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #5 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl ---
It is nice to be able to use it without bundling in the sources: just use
gnulib-tool with appropriate options to copy stuff at build time. This way one
always bundles the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
--- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com ---
ok, fair enough. Just wanted to make sure you didn't think you could unbundle
gnulib from all the packages that have it currently. :) Carry on.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review?
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Mosaab Alzoubi moc...@hotmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022283
Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||panem...@gmail.com
73 matches
Mail list logo
