Bug 507110

Updatet the SPEC and SRPM file because openal-soft-devel conflicts with openal-devel

Fixed all warnings of rpmlint

(Removing NEEDSPONSOR)

Fixed spec file because i had forget to add informations about my changes in the spec file

http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft.spec
http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft-1.8.466-3.fc11.src.rpm

(In reply to comment #3)
> (Removing NEEDSPONSOR)  

Mamoru, I'm willing to sponsor Thomas after this review because he is a friend of mine.

Some notes:

* License tag
  - For this package license tag should be "LGPLv2+".

* pkgconfig .pc file
  - openal.pc (note: see below) contains:
---------------------------------------------------
     3  libdir=${exec_prefix}//usr/lib
---------------------------------------------------
    (on i586), which is apparently wrong.

* Conflict
  - Fedora strongly recommends _not_ to use Conflicts: on
    such file namespace conflict like this and requests
    to resolve this type of conflicts:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts#Conflicting_Files

    I think
    - %_libdir/libopenal.so should be renamed to libopenal-soft.so
    - %_bindir/openal-info should be renamed to openal-soft-info
    - %_includedir/AL should be renamed to %_includedir/openal-soft
      or so (anyway the directory name "AL" is too short)
    - %_libdir/pkgconfig/openal.so should be renamed to openal-soft.pc
      and its contents should be modified to respect includedir
      name change
    - %_bindir/openal-config

(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (Removing NEEDSPONSOR)  
> 
> Mamoru, I'm willing to sponsor Thomas after this review because he is a friend
> of mine.  

- Well, I don't know how to change sponsor of one person on FAS...
  Anyway you can help Thomas in any way and I am happy with it.

(In reply to comment #6)
>     - %_bindir/openal-config

Ignore this line....

I think openal need to be replaced with openal-soft as it is in debian/ubuntu?
The devs and communtiy is talking about this sicene F10 was under dev.
What you think about that?

When i will rename all wo openal-soft the tools that need oal-soft header and libs will don´t find them.

(In reply to comment #8)
> I think openal need to be replaced with openal-soft as it is in debian/ubuntu?
> The devs and communtiy is talking about this sicene F10 was under dev.
> What you think about that?

- In such case (i.e. if you think openal should complete by
  replaced by openal-soft), would you contact openal maintainer?
  (Filing a bug against openal component is better with mentioning
   this review request on the filed bug).

> When i will rename all wo openal-soft the tools that need oal-soft header and
> libs will don´t find them.  

- This is okay because in such case it just means that such apps
  should be patched on Fedora.

ping?

In bug 501132 will be addressed whether by openal openal-soft in f12 replaced. But so far there is no response came from the maintainer.

Okay, then would you update this review request, Thomas?
Please make openal-soft have "Obsoletes: openal <= <some version>"

Added Obsoletes: openal <= 0.0.9 and remove Conflicts: openal-devel

http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft.spec
http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft-1.8.466-4.fc11.src.rpm

Fixed Obsoletes: and Provides: sections

http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft.spec
http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft-1.8.466-5.fc11.src.rpm

Well, would you address the issue in my comment 6?

(In reply to comment #6)
> Some notes:
> 
> * License tag
>   - For this package license tag should be "LGPLv2+".
> 
> * pkgconfig .pc file
>   - openal.pc (note: see below) contains:
> ---------------------------------------------------
>      3  libdir=${exec_prefix}//usr/lib
> ---------------------------------------------------
>     (on i586), which is apparently wrong.

Fixed: (In reply to comment #6)
> Some notes:
> 
> * License tag
>   - For this package license tag should be "LGPLv2+".
> 
> * pkgconfig .pc file
>   - openal.pc (note: see below) contains:
> ---------------------------------------------------
>      3  libdir=${exec_prefix}//usr/lib
> ---------------------------------------------------
>     (on i586), which is apparently wrong.

http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft.spec
http://www.linuxdonald.de/linuxdonald/openal-soft-1.8.466-6.fc11.src.rpm

Okay.

----------------------------------------------------------
    This package (openal-soft) is APPROVED by mtasaka
----------------------------------------------------------

This package should be imported only for F-12 because
this package obsoletes openal and there is soname bump
(libopenal.so.0 -> libopenal.so.1)

Also when importing into F-12, please announce it on
fedora-devel-list because packages depending on libopenal.so
need rebuilding.
Possibly affected packages can be searched by
# repoquery --repoid=rawhide --whatrequires libopenal.so.0 | sort

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: openal-soft
Short Description: OpenAL Soft is a cross-platform software implementation of the OpenAL 3D audio API.
Owners: linuxdonald
Branches: devel
InitialCC:

Well,
- Usually the "Shor Description" in new cvs request should be
  the "Summary" in the spec file
- And would you set fedora-cvs flag?

(In reply to comment #19)
> Well,
> - Usually the "Shor Description" in new cvs request should be

This is "Short Description"

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: openal-soft
Short Description: Open Audio Library
Owners: linuxdonald
Branches: devel
InitialCC:

cvs done.

When you rebuit this, please announce this on fedora-devel-list
because numbers of packages are affected by this.

i have send an mail to the fedora-devel-list.

Closing.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: openal-soft
New Branches: F-10, F-11
Owners: linuxdonald

It is not needed to reopen this bug with CVS change request.

By the way would you explain why you want to import this
package also on F-10/11? It will cause all packages depending
on openal to be rebuilt due to soversion change, which should
not happen in general on stable branches.

I've gone ahead and branched this because it's not really up to me to make the decision of whether this should be built or not, but I would still urge you to avoid breaking other packages in the stable releases.

CVS done.

The packager of AlienArena have requested that because it´s need to run
correctly openal-soft because it segfaults with openal

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515109

I will write the packager that uses opeanl an mail and say them that the must please upgrade thier packages.

openal-soft-1.8.466-7.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openal-soft-1.8.466-7.fc10

openal-soft-1.8.466-7.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/openal-soft-1.8.466-7.fc11

openal-soft-1.8.466-7.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

openal-soft-1.8.466-7.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: openal-soft
New Branches: EPEL 5
Owners: linuxdonald

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: openal-soft
New Branches: EPEL 6
Owners: linuxdonald

CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).