Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Merge Review: bsh|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Jochen Schmitt <jochen>|
|Status:||CLOSED NEXTRELEASE||QA Contact:||Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2007-06-21 14:12:26 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
Description Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it 2007-01-31 12:47:39 EST
Fedora Merge Review: bsh http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/bsh/ Initial Owner: email@example.com
Comment 1 Permaine Cheung 2007-03-29 11:57:26 EDT
Please review updated spec file and srpm at: https://pcheung.108.redhat.com/files/documents/174/359/bsh.spec https://pcheung.108.redhat.com/files/documents/174/360/bsh-1.3.0-10jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm
Comment 2 Jochen Schmitt 2007-03-29 12:17:52 EDT
Good: + Local build works fine. * Binaries packages are ok. + License ok. + naming seems ok. Bad: - Rpmlint have warnings on source package: W: bsh non-standard-group Development/Java W: bsh strange-permission bsh-1.3.0-src.tar.bz2 0660 W: bsh strange-permission bsh.spec 0660 W: bsh strange-permission bsh-build.patch 0660 - Unnecceasry BR uildRequires: perl should not be included (wiki: Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions) - Surce0 doesn't contains a full-qualified URL
Comment 3 Permaine Cheung 2007-03-29 12:34:27 EDT
(In reply to comment #2) > Good: > + Local build works fine. > * Binaries packages are ok. > + License ok. > + naming seems ok. > > Bad: > - Rpmlint have warnings on source package: > W: bsh non-standard-group Development/Java The group is ok > W: bsh strange-permission bsh-1.3.0-src.tar.bz2 0660 > W: bsh strange-permission bsh.spec 0660 > W: bsh strange-permission bsh-build.patch 0660 Fixed all the permission. > - Unnecceasry BR > uildRequires: perl should not be included Got rid of it > (wiki: Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions) > - Surce0 doesn't contains a full-qualified URL Source0 is created from cvs co, followed by creating the src tar ball, hence there's no full-qualified URL for it. Update spec file and srpm at the same location. Thanks! > > >
Comment 4 Jochen Schmitt 2007-03-29 13:08:06 EDT
question: What should this be? export LANG='C'; rpm -i bsh-1.3.0-10jpp.1.fc7.src.rpm error: open of <!DOCTYPE failed: No such file or directory error: open of HTML failed: No such file or directory error: open of PUBLIC failed: No such file or directory
Comment 5 Permaine Cheung 2007-03-29 13:45:28 EDT
hmm.. not quite sure what caused that, but I uploaded the srpm, could you please try again?
Comment 6 Jochen Schmitt 2007-03-29 14:00:22 EDT
Good: + Local build works fine. Bad: + Tar ball seems not to match with tar ball created from cvs reporistory a63a33e2580aea1884a9f3b0b9f62972 bsh-1.3.0-src.tar.bz2 [s4504kr@zeus temp]$ md5sum /home/s4504kr/redhat/SOURCES/bsh-1.3.0-src.tar.bz2 3d8c14c2a223aa577108efa8bd17bdd3 /home/s4504kr/redhat/SOURCES/bsh-1.3.0-src.tar.bz2
Comment 7 Permaine Cheung 2007-03-29 15:33:38 EDT
Is the tar ball created by following the commands in the spec file? If so, the md5sum will not match because of different ownership, in that case, a diff -r on the extracted tar ball is needed to check if the tar ball are the same.
Comment 8 Permaine Cheung 2007-04-25 15:05:53 EDT
Any update on this?
Comment 9 Jochen Schmitt 2007-04-26 11:56:28 EDT
Good: + Naming is ok (perhaps may be BeanShell) + Tar ball matches with update when using diff -r + Mock build works fine. + Binary rpms are ok. *** APPROVED ***
Comment 10 Permaine Cheung 2007-04-26 13:19:48 EDT
I'll keep the name as bsh as it has been shipped in previous Fedora release in that name. The package has been built, should hit rawhide soon.
Comment 11 Jochen Schmitt 2007-04-26 13:29:53 EDT
Thats ok, it was only a mind flash from me.
Comment 12 Jochen Schmitt 2007-05-22 10:43:14 EDT
Please close this bug after building the package.