|Summary:||Merge Review: aspell-pl - Polish dictionaries for Aspell|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Parag AN(पराग) <panemade>|
|Status:||CLOSED NEXTRELEASE||QA Contact:||Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||gajownik, mr.ecik, piotrdrag, varekova|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2011-09-05 05:47:16 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
Description Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it 2007-01-29 21:05:56 UTC
Fedora Merge Review: aspell-pl http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/aspell-pl/
Comment 1 Michał Bentkowski 2007-02-03 12:42:25 UTC
I'll attach a new spec file which fixes many things in this spec file, but its great feature is that it makes output file much smaller: 20M /repo/core/RPMS.core/aspell-pl-0.51-5.2.2.x86_64.rpm 2,3M /home/ecik/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/aspell-pl-6.0-1.20061121.x86_64.rpm This is done due to using of affix compression. I've also made some fixes to make this package fit for Extras.
Comment 2 Michał Bentkowski 2007-02-03 12:44:30 UTC
Created attachment 147271 [details] New spec file
Comment 3 Dawid Gajownik 2007-02-03 14:14:00 UTC
(In reply to comment #2) > Created an attachment (id=147271)  > New spec file Uhmm... you can't remove epoch tag now, because it will break update path from FC6 to F7. BTW It's not a blocker but it would be nicer to change order of tags to be compatible with default Fedora's spec template (/etc/rpmdevtools/spectemplate-minimal.spec from rpmdevtools package) :)
Comment 4 Michał Bentkowski 2007-02-03 18:48:20 UTC
Created attachment 147277 [details] aspell-pl-6.0-2.20061121 New, prettier spec file ;)
Comment 5 Jef Spaleta 2007-02-03 22:46:05 UTC
excellent..... (In reply to comment #4) > Created an attachment (id=147277)  > aspell-pl-6.0-2.20061121 > > New, prettier spec file ;) I was going to start marching my way through these aspell library packages as part of the merge review. The new build section you added to enable compression appears to be a general item that I can replicate in all the specs for all the libs. Would you agree? I'm going to do the review of your new spec file... and make that the basis of my merge review. The compression is just too damn good to not use for all the dictionaries. -jef
Comment 6 Jef Spaleta 2007-02-03 23:13:38 UTC
bah no i can't actually do the merge review of the new specfile, because it's using a different upstream src tarball. So i can't actually do the md5sum check against upstream and an srpm...there's no valid srpm which uses the new src location yet. I'll have to wait for the owner of this to incorporate your new spec, but other dictionaries I'll be able to include your compression fix and roll a spec without the other srcball change issue. Removing my review flag, until I can get a new srpm to chew on. -jef
Comment 7 Michał Bentkowski 2007-02-04 10:42:29 UTC
(In reply to comment #6) > I'll be able to include your compression fix and roll a spec > without the other srcball change issue. Yeah, but in this case that compression fix can by applied thanks to a new tarball.
Comment 8 Parag AN(पराग) 2007-03-30 10:27:12 UTC
Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). - rpmlint is NOT silent for SRPM and RPM. But following messages are ignorable E: aspell-pl no-binary E: aspell-pl only-non-binary-in-usr-lib E: aspell-pl configure-without-libdir-spec + SPEC file contains explanation about above warnings. + source files match upstream. 3139a69a1bd9ccb1d853d30aa024fc2b aspell6-pl-6.0_20061121-0.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required. + %doc does not affect runtime. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Dose owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Requires: aspell >= 12:0.60 + Provides: aspell-pl = 50:6.0_20061121-1.fc7 + Not a GUI APP. APPROVED.
Comment 9 Parag AN(पराग) 2007-04-11 03:31:07 UTC
As build is available now, therefore CLOSING this review.
Comment 10 Ivana Varekova 2011-05-04 07:58:03 UTC
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: aspell-pl Short Description: Polish dictionaries for Aspell Owners: varekova Branches: InitialCC:
Comment 11 Jason Tibbitts 2011-05-05 15:26:44 UTC
This package already exists in the package database; you cannot file a new package request for it. Could you describe what you need the SCM admins to do for you?
Comment 12 Jason Tibbitts 2011-05-10 15:12:48 UTC
I'll clear the fedora-cvs flag so this doesn't appear in the ticket list. Please do re-raise the flag if you provide the information I requested.
Comment 13 Parag AN(पराग) 2011-07-04 09:25:14 UTC
Ivana, Can this review be closed or you need any branch for this package?