Bug 637904

http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk.spec
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk-0.90.2-3.fc.src.rpm

* Tue Sep 28 2010 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka.u-tokyo.ac.jp> - 0.90.2-3
- Fix up dependency for ruby-%%gemname

http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk.spec
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk-0.90.2-4.fc.src.rpm

* Tue Sep 28 2010 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka.u-tokyo.ac.jp> - 0.90.2-4
- Fix up dependency for ruby-%%gemname
- Fix %%description

http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk.spec
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk-0.90.2-5.fc.src.rpm

* Fri Oct  1 2010 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka.u-tokyo.ac.jp> - 0.90.2-5
- Use formally released gem file

http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk.spec
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-atk/rubygem-atk-0.90.2-6.fc.src.rpm

* Fri Oct  1 2010 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka.u-tokyo.ac.jp> - 0.90.2-6
- Fix up summary

REVIEW:

[OK] Packages that contain Ruby Gems must be called rubygem-%{gemname}

[OK] The Source of the package must be the full URL to the released Gem archive; 

[OK] The package must have a Requires and a BuildRequires on rubygems

[OK] The Gem must be installed into %{gemdir} defined as

[OK] Architecture-specific content must not be installed into %{gemdir}

[OK] If the Gem contains binary content (e.g., for a database driver), it must be marked as architecture specific, and all architecture specific content must be moved from the %{gemdir} to the [#ruby_sitearch %{ruby_sitearch} directory] during %install

[OK] First, %prep stage must contain %setup -q -c -T to create the directory where C libraries are compiled.

[OK] Then at %build stage the Ruby Gem must be installed under the directory created at %prep stage to get C libraries compiled under there.

[OK] Finally at %install stage the whole tree under the directory created at %prep stage should be copied (not moved) to under %{buildroot}%{gemdir}.

All other review points are OK, macros are used consistently, GCC flags are set correctly.

Koji build fails (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2517406), because there is no "rubygem-glib2-devel" package, but it should be here soon (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637448).

Btw, just curious, but do you plan to package ruby-gtk bindings ?

REVIEW+

Thank you!

Now only commenting for this:

(In reply to comment #5)
> Btw, just curious, but do you plan to package ruby-gtk bindings ?

Please check bug 639098 and the bugs blocking the bug.
I will explain what I am trying to do now.

Currently ruby-gnome2 is already in Fedora:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=3765
and ruby-gtk2 binary rpm is currently created from ruby-gnome2 srpm.

Now ruby-gnome2 upstream also released gems for ruby-gtk2 part
from 0.90.0, so for ruby-gtk2 part (i.e. rsvg2 gtk2 pango gdk_pixbuf2
atk) I am going to make rpms based on released gem files, and make
rpms generated from ruby-gnome2 srpm obsoleted by gem-based rpm.

The rest part (i.e. bonobo2, gconf2, ...) still have to be rebuilt
from ruby-gnome2 srpm.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name:      rubygem-atk
Short Description: Ruby binding of ATK-1.x
Owners:            mtasaka
Branches:          f13 f14

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Rebuilt for F-13/14, push request submitted.

Closing as now available on rawhide.