Bug 204601
Summary: | Review Request: geda-examples - Circuit examples for gEDA | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | hdegoede, mtasaka, sdb, wk |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | kevin:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-09-06 16:15:37 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: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 204598 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Chitlesh GOORAH
2006-08-30 11:13:35 UTC
*** Bug 177416 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** This package is very simple and there exists little problems or questions. First review of geda-examples : 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : * Requires * File and Directory Ownership - Well, this package may be unuseful without geda-gschem, however, does this package "really require" geda-gschem? I mean that for example, xorg-x11-docs maybe unuseful without xorg-x11 installed, however, xorg-x11-docs itself does not require anything. If the problem is only for the ownership of %{_datadir}/gEDA/ (owned by geda-schem), this is a good reason for geda-symbols to own %{_datadir}/gEDA/, too, and the requirement for geda-gschem can be removed. You can see for example that /usr/share/X11/ is owned by several packages, e.g. imake, libX11, xorg-x11-xsm, xorg-x11-apps, ..... - Another thing is %{_datadir}/gEDA/examples . This is also owned by geda-gschem. If you think that this package (geda-examples) really requires geda-gschem, then the entry of %dir %{gedaexampledir} can be removed. Well, the problem of ownership of directories is complicated when there are several packages which are mutually related. 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : = Nothing. 3. Other things I have noticed: = Nothing. (In reply to comment #2) > This package is very simple and there exists little > problems or questions. > > > First review of geda-examples : > > 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : > > * Requires > * File and Directory Ownership > > - Well, this package may be unuseful without geda-gschem, > however, does this package "really require" geda-gschem? > > I mean that for example, xorg-x11-docs maybe unuseful without > xorg-x11 installed, however, xorg-x11-docs itself does not > require anything. > The files provided by this package can be read via schematic editor. That is why it requires geda-gschem Updated: Spec URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples-20060123-4.src.rpm (In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > - Well, this package may be unuseful without geda-gschem, > > however, does this package "really require" geda-gschem? > > > The files provided by this package can be read via schematic editor. That is why > it requires geda-gschem > Okay. > Updated: > Spec URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples.spec > SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples-20060123-4.src.rpm Well, it seems okay, however, this bug is blocked by bug 204598 (geda-gschem) and currently I cannot change the status of this bug. if the status bug 204598 changed, I can re-review (perhaps final check) this later. Updated: Spec URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples-20060824-1.src.rpm New upstream release OKay. Second review: * rpmlint issue Well, this package bears no rpmlint complaint, however, some files have Windows-type end-of-type encoding. add: for f in `find . -name \*.mod -or -name \*.cir -or -name \*.netlist | sort` ; do sed -i -e 's|\r||' $f ; done to %prep stage. I want to recheck this package once more. Updated: Spec URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples-20060824-2.src.rpm Well, doing "sed" before "%setup -q" (expanding src) does nothing. pdated: Spec URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples-20060824-3.src.rpm Corrected stupid mistake ! Well, another question: This package seems to have some empty directories: /usr/share/gEDA/examples/RF_Amp/model /usr/share/gEDA/examples/RF_Amp/sym /usr/share/gEDA/examples/TwoStageAmp/sym /usr/share/gEDA/examples/lightning_detector/sym What are these directories for? Updated: Spec URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples.spec SRPM URL: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/geda-examples-20060824-4.src.rpm Well, another question: This package seems to have some empty directories: /usr/share/gEDA/examples/RF_Amp/model /usr/share/gEDA/examples/RF_Amp/sym /usr/share/gEDA/examples/TwoStageAmp/sym /usr/share/gEDA/examples/lightning_detector/sym What are these directories for? Hmmm . . . . . These directories are *non-empty* on the gEDA on-line CVS: http://cvs.seul.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/eda/geda/gaf/examples/RF_Amp/model http://cvs.seul.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/eda/geda/gaf/examples/RF_Amp/sym etc . . . Is there a problem with the gEDA distrobution you got? Or are gEDA's build tools not fully up-to- date> Or perhaps an issue with the way Fedora archives and creates these files? I can look at my latest devel tree which I updated from CVS this morning. . . . please stand by until tomorrow when I am again at my computer. Stuart (In reply to comment #12) > Hmmm . . . . . These directories are *non-empty* on the gEDA on-line CVS: > > http://cvs.seul.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/eda/geda/gaf/examples/RF_Amp/model > http://cvs.seul.org/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/eda/geda/gaf/examples/RF_Amp/sym > > etc . . . > The directories which were empty in -3 seems to be not empty in -4 rpm. Perhaps it was packaging problem. I will check -4 rpm later. Okay. This package (geda-examples) is now ACCEPTED by me. (In reply to comment #13) > The directories which were empty in -3 seems to be not empty > in -4 rpm. Perhaps it was packaging problem. > > I will check -4 rpm later. It was indeed a packaging problem which occurs when I changed from 20060123 to snapshot 20060824 :) New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: geda-examples Short Description: Circuit examples for gEDA Owners: chitlesh Branches: EL-5 cvs done. |