Spec URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/spec/tcl-critcl.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/srpm/tcl-critcl-3.1.15-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Tcl package that provides on-the-fly compilation and execution of C code. A system to build C extension packages for Tcl on the fly, from C code embedded within Tcl scripts, for all who wish to make their code go faster. Fedora Account System Username: gerd Successful scratch builds: rawhide, f26: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15264115 f25: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15264161 f24: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15264249
The are some minor issues I could see. 1. Group tag is not required. 2. You should add "Provides: critcl" 3. man files are auto-gzipped during run, do not do it manually. 4. defattr is obsoleted. 5. license.terms file must go under %license macro. 6. I believe there is a misprint in license.terms: "other parties" should be "and other parties". And I'm not sure whether zlib sources could be supplied in examples. I suppose "yes" (and mark it somewhere near License tag in spec) but if you know other example that's would be great. Not so minor. 1. As I can see it is a fully noarch package. So all extensions must go to %{_datadir}/tcl%{tcl_version} but not %{_libdir}/tcl%{tcl_version} and "BuildArch: noarch" must be added. 2. critcl_c subdir contain parts of tcl and tk of different versions and part of X11. Is it really necessary? You should consider to use system ones or get the permission.
The link: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/spec/tcl-critcl.spec is updated and now points to: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/spec/tcl-critcl.spec.2 new SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/srpm/tcl-critcl-3.1.15-2.fc25.src.rpm - manually gzipping man files removed - defattr is removed - Group tag removed, Provides: critcl with version-release added - build the package as a noarch package Should the files /usr/share/tcl8.6/critcl3.1.15/critcl_c/tcl8.?/X11* be excluded? I will sent an email to upstream to fix the misprint in license.terms.
P.S. I do not know if it is useful. Scratch build URLs are: rawhide,F27: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18153983 F26: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18154185 F25: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18154377
I saw that the new release 3.1.16 is online. I updated to 3.1.16. The spec files of version 3.1.15 are moved to: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/spec/v3.1.15 The link: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/spec/tcl-critcl.spec is updated and now points to first version of 3.1.16: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/spec/tcl-critcl.spec.1 new SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/srpm/tcl-critcl-3.1.16-1.fc25.src.rpm This two lines are added in the spec file: %{__rm} -r lib/critcl/critcl_c/tcl8.[45] %{__rm} -r lib/critcl/critcl_c/tcl8.6/X11 If I build the rpm at my computer the architecture dependent file /usr/share/tcl8.6/critcl_md5c0.12/linux-x86_64/md5c.so will generated. Do anybody know what BuildRequires I must add that this will also be generated at a scratch build? f25 scratch build URL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18193058
(In reply to Gerd Pokorra from comment #2) > Should the files > /usr/share/tcl8.6/critcl3.1.15/critcl_c/tcl8.?/X11* > be excluded? > > I will sent an email to upstream to fix the misprint in license.terms. It must be removed in acse it's not required. It must get permission from releng if it does. And what can you say about zlib sources?
great! any update? hope get critcl in Fedora-26
Should we close it?
Yes, we could close it. I do not need the package any more. Ubuntu has a nice critcl package but I not not able to transport this to Fedora.