Bug 1061985
| Summary: | Review Request: coin-or-lemon - A C++ template library providing many common graph algorithms | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Andy Lutomirski <luto> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Antonio T. (sagitter) <anto.trande> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | luto, package-review |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | anto.trande:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | coin-or-lemon-1.3-6.fc20 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2014-06-17 23:23:06 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Andy Lutomirski
2014-02-06 02:02:17 UTC
- BSL (v1.0) is Boost Software License (http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt) It's okay in Fedora. - lemon-1.3/lemon/random.h is installed by this package and licensed with a BSD. Please, fix the License tag. - Your package put a cmake/ directory in %{_datadir}/lemon owned by 'lemon' package. 'lemon' is a Requires package. - '/usr/share/lemon/cmake' '/usr/share/doc/lemon' must be owned. - Use -p option in cp -r doc/html %{buildroot}/%{_docdir}/lemon/ - Please, leave a comment/link for the patch. - Try to agree with upstream about lib soname and /usr/lib issues, even by considering how you may intervene in the packaging process (read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jstanek/Draft_-_Downstream_.so_name_versioning) Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSL (v1.0)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (2 clause)". 169 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1061985-coin-or-lemon/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/doc/lemon/html, /usr/share/doc/lemon, /usr/share/lemon/cmake [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/doc/lemon, /usr/share/lemon, /usr/share/lemon/cmake, /usr/share/doc/lemon/html [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 3 files. [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in coin-or- lemon-doc [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: coin-or-lemon-1.3-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm coin-or-lemon-devel-1.3-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm coin-or-lemon-tools-1.3-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm coin-or-lemon-doc-1.3-1.fc21.noarch.rpm coin-or-lemon-1.3-1.fc21.src.rpm coin-or-lemon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US combinatorial -> combination coin-or-lemon.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libemon.so libemon.so coin-or-lemon.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libemon.so exit.5 coin-or-lemon-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-to-lgf coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lgf-gen coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-solver coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lemon-0.x-to-1.x.sh coin-or-lemon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US combinatorial -> combination coin-or-lemon.src:75: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib coin-or-lemon.src:10: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 10) 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 10 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint coin-or-lemon-tools coin-or-lemon-devel coin-or-lemon coin-or-lemon-doc coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-to-lgf coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lgf-gen coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-solver coin-or-lemon-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lemon-0.x-to-1.x.sh coin-or-lemon-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US combinatorial -> combination coin-or-lemon.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libemon.so libemon.so coin-or-lemon.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libemon.so /lib64/libm.so.6 coin-or-lemon.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libemon.so exit.5 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- coin-or-lemon-tools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/bash coin-or-lemon(x86-64) libc.so.6()(64bit) libemon.so()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) coin-or-lemon-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config coin-or-lemon(x86-64) coin-or-lemon (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) coin-or-lemon-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- coin-or-lemon-tools: coin-or-lemon-tools coin-or-lemon-tools(x86-64) coin-or-lemon-devel: coin-or-lemon-devel coin-or-lemon-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(lemon) coin-or-lemon: coin-or-lemon coin-or-lemon(x86-64) libemon.so()(64bit) coin-or-lemon-doc: coin-or-lemon-doc Unversioned so-files -------------------- coin-or-lemon: /usr/lib64/libemon.so Source checksums ---------------- http://lemon.cs.elte.hu/pub/sources/lemon-1.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6c190dbb1e17bdb71597e79c409b2e798ffcbdb7d764ea45d6299339b12d3e05 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6c190dbb1e17bdb71597e79c409b2e798ffcbdb7d764ea45d6299339b12d3e05 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1061985 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG I need of this package for others projects. Please, close this review as soon as possible. I should be able to get to this tomorrow or Monday. I suspect the biggest issue will be the /usr/share/lemon thing: there's already a package called 'lemon'. Oops. I'll probably rename it to /usr/share/coin-or-lemon. Spec URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/coin-or-lemon_v2/coin-or-lemon.spec SRPM URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/coin-or-lemon_v2/coin-or-lemon-1.3-2.fc20.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6925124 Description: LEMON stands for Library for Efficient Modeling and Optimization in Networks. It is a C++ template library providing efficient implementations of common data structures and algorithms with focus on combinatorial optimization tasks connected mainly with graphs and networks. Fedora Account System Username: amluto This version should be a lot better. - %define libemon_soversion 0.1 Use %global instead of %define http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define - Reminder: %{_pkgdocdir} macro works differently in Fedora<20, package building fails now in f19. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6927156 See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UnversionedDocdirs - Minor warnings coin-or-lemon.src:85: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib Needed for the patch. coin-or-lemon.src:11: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 11) Please, fix them. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSL (v1.0)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (2 clause)". 169 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1061985-coin-or-lemon/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 3 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in coin-or- lemon-doc [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [!]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Note: %define requiring justification: %define libemon_soversion 0.1 [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: coin-or-lemon-1.3-2.fc21.i686.rpm coin-or-lemon-devel-1.3-2.fc21.i686.rpm coin-or-lemon-tools-1.3-2.fc21.i686.rpm coin-or-lemon-doc-1.3-2.fc21.noarch.rpm coin-or-lemon-1.3-2.fc21.src.rpm coin-or-lemon.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US combinatorial -> combination coin-or-lemon.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libemon.so.0.1 exit coin-or-lemon-devel.i686: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-to-lgf coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lgf-gen coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-solver coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lemon-0.x-to-1.x.sh coin-or-lemon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US combinatorial -> combination coin-or-lemon.src:85: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib coin-or-lemon.src:11: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 11) 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 10 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint coin-or-lemon-tools coin-or-lemon-devel coin-or-lemon coin-or-lemon-doc coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-to-lgf coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lgf-gen coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dimacs-solver coin-or-lemon-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lemon-0.x-to-1.x.sh coin-or-lemon-devel.i686: W: no-documentation coin-or-lemon.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US combinatorial -> combination coin-or-lemon.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libemon.so.0.1 /lib/libm.so.6 coin-or-lemon.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libemon.so.0.1 exit 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- coin-or-lemon-tools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/bash coin-or-lemon(x86-32) libc.so.6 libemon.so.0.1 libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0) libm.so.6 libstdc++.so.6 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) rtld(GNU_HASH) coin-or-lemon-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config coin-or-lemon(x86-32) libemon.so.0.1 coin-or-lemon (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6 libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0) libm.so.6 libstdc++.so.6 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) rtld(GNU_HASH) coin-or-lemon-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- coin-or-lemon-tools: coin-or-lemon-tools coin-or-lemon-tools(x86-32) coin-or-lemon-devel: coin-or-lemon-devel coin-or-lemon-devel(x86-32) pkgconfig(lemon) coin-or-lemon: coin-or-lemon coin-or-lemon(x86-32) libemon.so.0.1 coin-or-lemon-doc: coin-or-lemon-doc Source checksums ---------------- http://lemon.cs.elte.hu/pub/sources/lemon-1.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6c190dbb1e17bdb71597e79c409b2e798ffcbdb7d764ea45d6299339b12d3e05 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6c190dbb1e17bdb71597e79c409b2e798ffcbdb7d764ea45d6299339b12d3e05 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-i386 -b 1061985 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG Spec URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/coin-or-lemon_v3/coin-or-lemon.spec SRPM URL: http://web.mit.edu/luto/www/fedora/coin-or-lemon_v3/coin-or-lemon-1.3-3.fc20.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6927465 F19 koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6927460 Description: LEMON stands for Library for Efficient Modeling and Optimization in Networks. It is a C++ template library providing efficient implementations of common data structures and algorithms with focus on combinatorial optimization tasks connected mainly with graphs and networks. Fedora Account System Username: amluto Also, what's this? [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. I'm not seeing that in a self-review. (In reply to Andy Lutomirski from comment #6) > > Also, what's this? > > [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. > > I'm not seeing that in a self-review. It's related to the %{_pkgdocdir} directory that's co-owned by 'coin-or-lemon' and 'coin-or-lemon-doc'. To me, it's okay because if separately installed both packages need that directory. Ignore it. Package approved. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: coin-or-lemon Short Description: A C++ template library providing many common graph algorithms Upstream URL: http://lemon.cs.elte.hu/trac/lemon Owners: amluto Branches: f19 f20 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). coin-or-lemon-1.3-3.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/coin-or-lemon-1.3-3.fc19 If you find yourself needing GLPK support, let me know and I can try to hack around the upstream bug that's currently blocking it. coin-or-lemon-1.3-3.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/coin-or-lemon-1.3-3.fc20 coin-or-lemon-1.3-3.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 testing repository. coin-or-lemon-1.3-6.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. |