[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Jiri Kastner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|---

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Guy Streeter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co |needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co

needinfo canceled: [Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Guy Streeter has canceled Package Review 's request for Jiri Kastner 's needinfo: Bug 1256492: Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Guy Streeter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(guy.streeter@gmai | |l.com)

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Jiri Kastner changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(guy.streeter@gmai

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Jiri Kastner changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(cz172...@gmail.co | |m)

needinfo canceled: [Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Jiri Kastner has canceled Package Review 's request for Jiri Kastner 's needinfo: Bug 1256492: Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Jiri Kastner changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|jkast...@redhat.com |cz172...@gmail.com -- You are

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Guy Streeter changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #15 from Jiri Kastner --- why "ExclusiveArch: x86_64" is not buildable for arm and i386 which are also primary architectures? why not use this like in packaging guidelines for python? %build %py2_build

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #16 from Guy Streeter --- As far as I know, only x86_64 has NUMA architecture. When I started this, libnuma was only available on that architecture. I see that it is available for the rest now, so I can remove

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #18 from Guy Streeter --- numactl is not being built for arm: * Sat Jun 18 2011 Peter Robinson - 2.0.7-2 - Exclude ARM platforms I've copied the ExcludeArch line from the numactl

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #17 from Guy Streeter --- The py3_build/install macros are not available in Fedora 21. They were added to F22. I'll change the python2 commands to use the macros, but leave the python3 commands as they are

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #19 from Guy Streeter --- Above changes checked in. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1418 https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/streeter/python-hwloc/ -- You are receiving this mail

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #14 from Guy Streeter --- I've committed version 2.2.3-2.0: removed %clean added %check stripped the binary added license text to source files. Built in koji:

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #13 from Jiri Kastner --- This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla: - Add issues you find to the list of issues

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #7 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com --- for example dnf: upstream - https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf and fedora git tree for package - http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/dnf.git/tree/ for specfile and patches

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #8 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com --- I understand now. I thought you were saying I should make a specfile that would be edited to produce each package, one at a time. I can create a specfile that builds both packages at the

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #9 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com --- +1 :) -- 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

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #10 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com --- How does this look? $ rpm -qlp SRPMS/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc21.src.rpm python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.tar.gz python-libnuma.spec $ rpm -qlp

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #11 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com --- [indy@localhost python-libnuma]$ rpmbuild -bs ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-libnuma.spec Wrote: /home/indy/rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-libnuma-2.2-2.0.fc22.src.rpm [indy@localhost python-libnuma]$

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #12 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com --- I forgot to push a tag for it. There is am upstream source file now. --Guy -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #4 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com --- The combined specfile would have to be edited and checked in to build each of the packages, one at a time. I don't see an advantage to that. Keeping them separate will also allow fixes

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #6 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com --- I promise I'm not trying to be difficult. If that's the correct way to set it up, I'll change it. Perhaps there's something about the way packages are built in the distro I don't

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #5 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com --- hey man, do you want to get package reviewed? :) one specfile means one review, less mess. i'm not aware of any package maintained in way you want to go. i would understand your attitude

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jkast...@redhat.com

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #2 from Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com --- Jiri, Thank you for reviewing this package. The source is used to build two separate packages, python-libnuma and python3-libnuma. That's the reason there are 2 specfiles. I don't

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 --- Comment #3 from Jiri Kastner jkast...@redhat.com --- tito - https://github.com/dgoodwin/tito rpmbuild with -tX options works on tarball directly if spec file is in toplevel directory you can have one specfile and put all to it. and use

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Guy Streeter stree...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841

[Bug 1256492] Review Request: python-libnuma - Python bindings for the numactl library

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1256492 Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1083720