https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
Christopher Meng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cicku...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
james changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamescateg...@gmail.com
Version|rawh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #3 from james ---
Here are the SPEC/SRPM files hosted on fedorapeople:
SPEC url: http://jam3s.fedorapeople.org/yarock.spec
SRPM url: http://jam3s.fedorapeople.org/yarock-0.9.64-1.fc20.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail becau
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
Terje Røsten changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no
--- Comment #4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #5 from james ---
@Terje Røsten: I've applied all the changes you suggested except one. I had
already tried %cmake and it didn't work for me. In fact using %cmake would lead
to many errors during "make". I played with it a lot but
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter ---
james, can you document what some of those problems were when you tried using
%cmake macro?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
Rex Dieter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu
Blocks|
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter ---
Some initial comments
1. manual dependencies:
Requires: qt
Requires: taglib
Requires: qjson
Requires: libechonest
Requires: phonon
Requires: sqlite
rpm should pick tho
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
Kevin Fenzi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ke...@scrye.com
Blocks|177841
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #11 from Rex Dieter ---
> %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/application-x-yarock.png
This is a new packager, please give them reasons/justifications to follow your
advice. While that's a little better, being one line, I still do
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #10 from Terje Røsten ---
Build is not verbose, not possible to verify build flags.
--
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=1032108
--- Comment #12 from Terje Røsten ---
> For example, your suggestion will needlessly fail the build when/if upstream
> includes scalable/svg icons.
I want control over shipped files, changes should trigger a failed build.
Control is more im
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #8 from Rex Dieter ---
fwiw, I disagree with a prior comment, I consider using
%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/*/*
glob in %files fine. In fact, it's simpler and more readable for simple
package like this.
(I'd welcome rationale/ju
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #9 from Terje Røsten ---
Use %{_prefix} for /usr.
Important: proper updating of changelog, describe every change you did,
impossible to review without proper changelog.
rex: a compromise: %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/applica
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #14 from james ---
> rpm should pick those up automatically (ie, if those libraries are linked into
> the executbable).
yes I know but better be safe than sorry ;)
> add icons scriptlets,
> and dependency on hicolor-icon-theme:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #15 from james ---
> I've sponsored james to help co-maintain a infrastructure package. Removing
> the
> NEEDSPONSOR here.
Thank you Kevin. much appreciated ;)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #16 from Rex Dieter ---
> yes I know but better be safe than sorry ;)
better to abide by the recommended guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
"... Packages mu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #17 from Terje Røsten ---
(In reply to Rex Dieter from comment #16)
> > yes I know but better be safe than sorry ;)
>
> better to abide by the recommended guidelines:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Pa
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #18 from Rex Dieter ---
Re: verbosity
another consequence of not using %cmake macro which sets for you:
-DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE=ON
to see all the default options set, try:
rpm --eval "%cmake"
--
You are receiving this mail be
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #19 from James Abtahi ---
> better to abide by the recommended guidelines:
> if e.g qt gets renamed to e.g qt5 you are in trouble, while with no explicit
> deps you are fine.
Ok, See what you mean. fixed.
> make %{?_smp_mflags}
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032108
--- Comment #20 from Terje Røsten ---
> Ok, See what you mean. fixed.
Thanks, great progress so far!
> I see the difference but I have a hard time spotting any issues during the
> build time. The link you provided mention %{optflags}, shal
21 matches
Mail list logo
