Bug 1195375 - Review Request: autoconf268 - autoconf 2.68 for epel6
Summary: Review Request: autoconf268 - autoconf 2.68 for epel6
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Orion Poplawski
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1174292
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-02-23 17:01 UTC by Dave Love
Modified: 2015-04-01 01:59 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: autoconf268-2.68-2.el6
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-04-01 01:59:20 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
orion: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Dave Love 2015-02-23 17:01:16 UTC
Spec URL: https://loveshack.fedorapeople.org/review/autoconf268.spec
SRPM URL: https://loveshack.fedorapeople.org/review/autoconf268-2.68-1.el6.src.rpm
Description: autoconf 2.68 for epel6
Fedora Account System Username: loveshack

This provides an updated autoconf for epel6 to support packaging things
which need to use autoconf 2.68 after patching their configuration files,
e.g. <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174292>.  It's minimally
modified from the RHEL autoconf-2.63 packaging, with names by analogy with
cmake28 and autoconf213.

koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9037957

Comment 1 Orion Poplawski 2015-02-27 03:29:26 UTC
Thanks for putting this together.  First notes:

You should make use of the requires/provides filtering mechanism described here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging_Autoprovides_and_Requires_Filtering

Drop %defattr()

No need for %clean or rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}, or BuildRoot.

Otherwise looks good.

Comment 2 Dave Love 2015-03-05 22:17:18 UTC
I can change it if really necessary, but it has minimal changes from the
RHEL source.  Why is it worth the effort making it different (not a rhetorical
question)?  It seems more maintainable if anything to reflect the original.

Comment 3 Orion Poplawski 2015-03-05 22:25:18 UTC
Because this is a Fedora EPEL package, and I want it to conform to the Fedora EPEL guidelines and not have a bunch of old cruft in it.

Comment 4 Dave Love 2015-03-08 17:57:02 UTC
I made the changes, though I must say it seems at best a waste of effort.
I didn't change the version for cosmetic spec mods.

Comment 5 Orion Poplawski 2015-03-11 02:45:40 UTC
Looks good, thanks.  I would have preferred bumping release, but I think you're already aware of what a stickler I am.

One other suggestion:

%check
# Test fails: 205: parallel autotest and signal handling 
make check VERBOSE=yes || :

this would allow the tests to be logged in the build but not break it.

But not a show stopper.  APPROVED.

Comment 6 Dave Love 2015-03-11 14:24:00 UTC
Thanks.  I'll make the check change and bump the release.
If there's good reason to update release numbers for spec changes in review,
perhaps it could be added to the guidelines so it's not just a matter of
judgement; I've seen cases where it wasn't done.  I'll follow rules of course
(preferably with mechanical support).

Comment 7 Dave Love 2015-03-11 14:28:02 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: autoconf268
Short Description: A GNU tool for automatically configuring source code
Upstream URL: http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/
Owners: loveshack
Branches: el6

Comment 8 Gwyn Ciesla 2015-03-11 16:48:38 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2015-03-11 22:47:33 UTC
autoconf268-2.68-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/autoconf268-2.68-2.el6

Comment 10 Orion Poplawski 2015-03-12 02:47:32 UTC
Well, it was nice thought:

autoreconf268: running: aclocal --force -I ../build-config/m4 -I ../vendor/common/build-config/m4
../build-includes/common.m4:100: error: Libtool version 2.4 or higher is required

Comment 11 Dave Love 2015-03-12 13:25:31 UTC
(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #10)
> Well, it was nice thought:
> 
> autoreconf268: running: aclocal --force -I ../build-config/m4 -I
> ../vendor/common/build-config/m4
> ../build-includes/common.m4:100: error: Libtool version 2.4 or higher is
> required

I don't understand.  That's not a problem with autoconf, just a requirement of
a package.

Comment 12 Orion Poplawski 2015-03-12 22:13:46 UTC
We're going to need a libtool24 package then as well to make this useful.  May want to test this out in a copr before going too far down this road.

Comment 13 Dave Love 2015-03-13 10:28:05 UTC
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #11)
> I don't understand.  That's not a problem with autoconf, just a requirement
> of
> a package.

Sorry, I realize it was in reference to #1174292, but I can do libtool if
anything else needs it.  It's a pity we can't just use the autotools SCL.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2015-03-13 15:44:27 UTC
autoconf268-2.68-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository.

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2015-04-01 01:59:20 UTC
autoconf268-2.68-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.