Bug 211763 - Review Request: jikes - Java source to bytecode compiler
Review Request: jikes - Java source to bytecode compiler
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On: 149781
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-10-22 05:39 EDT by Paul F. Johnson
Modified: 2009-07-17 15:15 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-02-17 01:02:15 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Paul F. Johnson 2006-10-22 05:39:26 EDT
Spec URL: http://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/jikes.spec
SRPM URL: http://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/jikes-1.22-1.src.rpm
Description: 

The IBM Jikes compiler translates Java source files to bytecode. It
also supports incremental compilation and automatic makefile generation, and is maintained by the Jikes Project
Comment 1 Gérard Milmeister 2006-10-22 09:47:55 EDT
Jikes is already in Extras.
Comment 2 Ville Skyttä 2006-10-22 11:55:04 EDT
Yes, OTOH orphaned and already dropped from the devel repo.
Comment 3 Paul F. Johnson 2006-10-22 15:05:57 EDT
#1 : I couldn't see it, which is why I've put it up for review

#2 : Could you give it the once over and I'll adopt it?
Comment 4 Gérard Milmeister 2006-10-23 15:54:00 EDT
* Summary must start with uppercase
* The URL is now jikes.sourceforge.net
* Both descriptions must end with a period
* The installation of the man page is wrong -> no star wildcard
* There must be a "rm -rf %{buildroot}" at the beginning of the %install section
* The release number of the current FC5 rpm is 5, so make it at least 6

I wonder what the jikesapi.h header can be used for...
Comment 5 Ville Skyttä 2006-10-23 16:09:26 EDT
I'd suggest just unorphaning the current jikes package from FE CVS (FC-5 
branch) as usual instead of rewriting everything from scratch.  It's in a good 
shape (IIRC, I used to maintain it ;)) and has some post-upstream-1.22 
bugfixes that are important to some users.
Comment 6 Gérard Milmeister 2006-10-23 17:13:08 EDT
(In reply to comment #5)
> I'd suggest just unorphaning the current jikes package from FE CVS (FC-5 
> branch) as usual instead of rewriting everything from scratch.  It's in a good 
> shape (IIRC, I used to maintain it ;))
In that case, maybe you should take over the review.
Comment 7 Ville Skyttä 2006-10-23 17:24:42 EDT
I don't think the package currently in CVS needs a (re-)review, the usual 
unorphan process should work just fine for it, and this bug could be closed as 
WONTFIX.  But maybe that's just me...

OTOH, if the package in CVS does need a re-review, it wouldn't make much sense 
for me to review it, being blind to one's own bugs etc.
Comment 8 Gérard Milmeister 2006-11-12 17:09:03 EST
Paul, would you submit the original src rpm? I will look it over quickly.
Comment 9 Paul F. Johnson 2006-11-12 17:59:31 EST
Do you mean the version that is in CVS or the one you can find at
http://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/srpms.shtml ?
Comment 10 Gérard Milmeister 2007-02-24 09:20:48 EST
I would say the one from CVS, since it contains some patches.
Comment 11 Jason Tibbitts 2008-01-19 18:56:51 EST
It's been eleven months since the last comment; is anyone still working on this?
Comment 12 Gérard Milmeister 2008-02-22 18:46:15 EST
I am no longer interested in reviewing this. Is anyone else?
Comment 13 Jon Stanley 2008-05-15 00:33:25 EDT
FWIW, it looks like the FC-5 branch still builds:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=610129

It does need a full review per the process I think for reviving it.  Paul, are
you still interested in this?
Comment 14 Caius Chance 2009-02-17 01:02:15 EST
Address Not Found for the srpm url.

Please reopen if anyone interested to have this review again.

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