Bug 283441
| Summary: | Review Request: sdljava - Java binding to the SDL API | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Hans de Goede <hdegoede> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Gwyn Ciesla <gwync> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | gwync:
fedora-review+
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: | 2007-09-21 20:42:23 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
Hans de Goede
2007-09-08 09:40:00 UTC
I don't think the last sentence of %description ("Finally ...") adds any value
in the package. On the contrary, actually.
(In reply to comment #1) > I don't think the last sentence of %description ("Finally ...") adds any value > in the package. On the contrary, actually. That comes from the packman (suse addon repo) specfile I based my work on and I guess they took it from an upstream description, I agree with you and I'll remove it in the next iteration or before import. Here: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava-0.9.1-2.fc8.src.rpm Is a new version fixing a rather major packaging bug: * Tue Sep 11 2007 Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede> 0.9.1-2 - Dynamically determine gcc include path instead of hardcoding it, so that sdljava will build on other setups then devel-x86_64 too (oops). And also cleaning up the description per comment #1 New version fixing the dynamic determination of gcc include path, which was broken somehow (I did test it) on the new version: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava-0.9.1-3.fc8.src.rpm rpmlint on the RPMS. . . sdljava.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/sdljava-0.9.1/CHANGES_0_9_1 The character encoding of this file is not UTF-8. Consider converting it in the specfile for example using iconv(1). sdljava-demo.i386: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. sdljava-demo.i386: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/sdljava/testdata/ariali.ttf ../../fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Oblique.ttf The relative symbolic link points nowhere. sdljava-demo.i386: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/sdljava/testdata/arialbd.ttf ../../fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Bold.ttf The relative symbolic link points nowhere. sdljava-demo.i386: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/sdljava/testdata/arialbi.ttf ../../fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-BoldOblique.ttf The relative symbolic link points nowhere. sdljava-javadoc.i386: W: dangerous-command-in-%post rm Here is a new version with the UTF-8 issue fixed: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava-0.9.1-4.fc8.src.rpm The other rpmlint messages are non-issues (the font files the symlinks point to are explicitly required). Ok, looks otherwise great after a full review, until I did a mock build to test BRs.
<snip>
+ /usr/bin/aot-compile-rpm
/usr/bin/gcj -c -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions
-fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fPIC -findirect-dispatch -fjni
sdljava-0.9.1.jar.1.jar -o sdljava-0.9.1.jar.1.o
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:156056: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized
character is `-'
{standard input}:156057: Error: bad or irreducible absolute expression
{standard input}:156057: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized
character is `,'
{standard input}:156060: Error: unrecognized symbol type ""
{standard input}:156060: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized
character is `-'
{standard input}:156061: Error: expected comma after name
`_CD_sdljava_audio_package' in .size directive
{standard input}:156062: Error: invalid character '_' in mnemonic
{standard input}:156066: Error: unrecognized symbol type ""
{standard input}:156066: Error: junk at end of line, first unrecognized
character is `-'
<snip>
{standard input}:422422: Error: expected comma after name
`_catch_classes_sdljavax.gfx.package' in .size directive
{standard input}:422423: Error: invalid character '_' in mnemonic
make: *** [sdljava-0.9.1.jar.1.o] Error 1
aot-compile-rpm: error: /usr/bin/make exited with code 2
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.57191 (%install)
Nasty, not a BuildRequires problem, but it doesn't build when using gcj to build the .class files, see: bug 297961. I've added icedtea to the BuildRequires to fix this for building on devel, trying a mockbuild on F-7 now, to see if it will build with the gcj in F-7. Here is the new version for devel: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/sdljava-0.9.1-5.fc8.src.rpm Okay, I just tried an F-7 mock build and there everything works fine, so this can still go to F-7 as well as devel, but on devel we need to use icedtea for building for now. diff of specs:
< Release: 5%{?dist}
---
> Release: 4%{?dist}
24,28d23
< # Build fails on fedora 8 test 2 when not using icedtea :( Note it runs fine
< # with gcj (bug 297961).
< BuildRequires: java-1.7.0-icedtea-devel
< # icedtea is i386 and x86_64
< ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64
95a91
>
199,201d194
< * Thu Sep 20 2007 Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede> 0.9.1-5
< - BuildRequire icedtea as building with gcj fails (bug 297961)
<
This also means I can't build on F-7. How will you accommodate that?
Conditional BRs, or divergent specs?
Divergent specs, thats what we have branches for in CVS. In that case, APPROVED. Thanks! New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: sdljava Short Description: Java binding to the SDL API Owners: jwrdegoede Branches: F-7 devel InitialCC: <empty> Cvsextras Commits: yes cvs done. Imported and build for both devel and F-7, building for ppc on F-7 was quite a bit of pain, but I've managed to get it working eventually. |