Bug 677946

*** Bug 615783 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

The package missed a BuildRequires, so here's an updated version: 

Spec URL: http://mgieseki.fedorapeople.org/liblouisutdml/liblouisutdml.spec
SRPM URL:
http://mgieseki.fedorapeople.org/liblouisutdml/liblouisutdml-1.7.0-2.fc14.src.rpm

Tried to a mock build for Fedora 14.  Failed because liblouis-devel >= 2.2.0 doesn't exist in that release.  Fedora 15 mock build succeeded

rpmlint liblouisutdml.spec

liblouisutdml.spec:70: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 70)

Easily fixable. 

rpmlint *.src.rpm
liblouisutdml.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblouisxml -> libelous
liblouisutdml.src:70: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 70)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

rpmlint *.rpm
liblouisutdml.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblouisxml -> libelous
liblouisutdml.src:70: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 70)
liblouisutdml.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblouisxml -> libelous
liblouisutdml-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
liblouisutdml-java.noarch: W: no-documentation
liblouisutdml-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lbu_devonly
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

Packaging naming follows guidelines. Java bindings sub package is named correctly.  

pkgconfig file and soname is part of the devel package as required

verified that sub packages either depend on the main package or have licensing information by themselves 

verified that jar files are not included in source but compiled according to the java packaging guidelines

verified requires and post/postun is correct for info files


The library is LGPLv3+ but the utilities are under GPLv3+ according to the readme and this is reflected correctly in the license tag.  

Actions required:

Consider removing buildroot definitions and clean section since they are superfluous unless you are branching for older EPEL. 

Do a comment on top of Provides: bundled(gnulib) = 20091111 explaining it. 

Should liblouisutdml-java sub package co-own /usr/share/java or add a requires on jpackage-utils?

Might consider whether documents should be part of a separate -docs sub package depending on how the library is used and which apps are likely to depend on them. 

It is helpful to explicitly name the binaries and a brief one liner in the description of -utils.  Helps for users using yum search and yum info

If liblouisutdml is successor to liblouisxml, should the former obsolete the latter? 

Could consider adding a brief one liner to the sub package descriptions describing the functionality of the main package.  

Can you explain the purpose of
ln -s %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar %{buildroot}%{_javadir}/j%{name}.jar

/usr/bin/lbu_devonly doesn't have a man page and I recommend asking upstream to add them or add and send them upstream.   Running /usr/bin/lbu_devonly in my Fedora 15 system causes a core dump.  Look into that as well.

(In reply to comment #3)
> Tried to a mock build for Fedora 14.  Failed because liblouis-devel >= 2.2.0
> doesn't exist in that release. 

Maybe mock's yum cache wasn't up-to-date? The latest version of liblouis-devel is present in F14:
$ repoquery liblouis-devel
liblouis-devel-0:2.2.0-2.fc14.i686


> liblouisutdml.spec:70: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab:
> line 70)

Fixed.


> Consider removing buildroot definitions and clean section since they are
> superfluous unless you are branching for older EPEL. 

Dropped the buildroot stuff as I don't intend to build the package for EPEL<6.


> Do a comment on top of Provides: bundled(gnulib) = 20091111 explaining it. 

Done.


> Should liblouisutdml-java sub package co-own /usr/share/java or add a requires
> on jpackage-utils?

Yes, I forgot to add Requires: jpackage-utils. Fixed now.


> Might consider whether documents should be part of a separate -docs sub package
> depending on how the library is used and which apps are likely to depend on
> them. 

OK, moved all docs to a -doc subpackage. They all contain information for both end-users and developers.


> It is helpful to explicitly name the binaries and a brief one liner in the
> description of -utils.  Helps for users using yum search and yum info

Done.


> If liblouisutdml is successor to liblouisxml, should the former obsolete the
> latter? 

liblouisxml hasn't been packaged for Fedora, so there's no need to obsolete it.


> Could consider adding a brief one liner to the sub package descriptions
> describing the functionality of the main package.  

Done.


> Can you explain the purpose of
> ln -s %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar %{buildroot}%{_javadir}/j%{name}.jar

According to the guidelines, the name of the jar file must be %{name}.jar. However, upstream uses j%{name}.jar. In order to stay compatible with it, I added a symlink with the alternative name. If this is not desired, I'd drop it again.

 
> /usr/bin/lbu_devonly doesn't have a man page and I recommend asking upstream to
> add them or add and send them upstream.   Running /usr/bin/lbu_devonly in my
> Fedora 15 system causes a core dump.  Look into that as well.

I reported the segfault upstream:
http://code.google.com/p/liblouisutdml/issues/detail?id=1

Since this seems to be a serious problem, I've excluded lbu_devonly for now. It also seems to be a utility for developers only not intended for end-users. I'm waiting for a response from the developer about this.


Spec: http://mgieseki.fedorapeople.org/liblouisutdml/liblouisutdml.spec
SRPM: http://mgieseki.fedorapeople.org/liblouisutdml/liblouisutdml-1.7.0-3.fc14.src.rpm

Above the rm removing lbu_devonly,  add a comment linking to the segfault bug report.   Also I think the docs sub package should depend on the main package.   Not blocking the review on these however.  Make those changes as you see fit and import.

Also,  I am not sure about whether the symlink is actually necessary but I don't see it hurting much either.  Hence


--------
APPROVED
--------

Rahul, thank you very much for the review! I'll think about your additional comments before importing the package into the Git repo. The comment mentioning the bug report is already present above the %exclude statement in %files utils.


New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: liblouisutdml
Short Description: Braille transcription library for UTDML documents
Owners: mgieseki
Branches: f14 f15
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc14

liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc15

liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository.

liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository.

liblouisutdml-1.7.0-4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.