Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml-curl.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml-curl-0.2.1-1.src.rpm Description: ocurl is a wrapper around the CURL library.
will start at tomorrow
(In reply to comment #1) > will start at tomorrow Richard is not sponsored at the moment, plus I'll note that I've talked to a couple of people that'd be able to sponsor Richard with these packages, they seem to want to wait until the ocaml guidelines are in. Personally I would have reviewed half the ocaml- packages by now if it was possible ;) (I don't think this is anything new to Richard, I think I told him the other week)
Xavier, Nigel: Just a quick note to say that I'll be bringing out updated versions of these packages when I have time (probably next week). I intend to: (1) Make sure they all compile on bytecode-only architectures. (2) Remove the recursive call to rpm in ocaml-find-requires.sh (3) Change the mod deps to ocaml(Module) = hash (4) Investigate getting ocaml-find-requires/ocaml-find-provides into rpmbuild base so that we don't need external scripts (5) (Possibly) rebase to OCaml 3.10 (#5 is ambitious) These come out of the Fedora Packaging meeting last Tuesday (see the IRC log here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Minutes20070605?highlight=ocaml ) Rich.
ho! So the block NEEDSPONSOR should be set. this guideline it's a good point.
This package has a dependency on ocaml-findlib-devel which isn't in the repository yet. This dependency has been requested for a review which shoulb be approved and imported before make a full review of this one. Note: So i added this review request in dependency block.
Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-curl.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-curl-0.2.1-2.src.rpm Updated to latest OCaml packaging guidelines. Built against OCaml 3.10. Tested against bytecode-only architectures.
Starting review...
=== REQUIRED ITEMS === [ OK ] Package successfully compiles and builds on at least one supported arch. [ OK ] Mock built on x86_64 [ F-Devel ] [ OK ] Package is named according to the Package Naming and Ocaml Guidelines. [ OK ] Spec file name match the packaging naming Ocaml guidelines. [ Ok ] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [ OK ] Package is not relocatable. [ OK ] Buildroot is correct [ OK ] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license. [ OK ] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: LGPL [ OK ] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [ OK ] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [ OK ] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. [ OK ] The spec file handles locales properly. [ OK ] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [ OK ] Package must own all directories that it creates. [ OK ] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [ OK ] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [ OK ] Permissions on files are set properly. [ OK ] Package has a %clean section. [ OK ] Package consistently uses macros. [ OK ] Package contains code, or permissable content. [ SKIP ] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [ OK ] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [ SKIP ] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [ SKIP ] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present. [ SKIP ] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. [ SKIP ] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [ CHECK ] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [ OK ] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [ SKIP ] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file. [ OK ] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages According to OCaml Packaging Guideline: [ OK ] OCaml modules / libs should be named ocaml-foo. [ OK ] The spec file should still build bytecode libraries and binaries. [ OK ] Should Test if the native compiler is present. [ OK ] main package should contain files matching all files which mentioned in OCaml guideline (if present). [ OK ] -devel sub-package Should contains all files which're mentioned in OCaml guidelines (if present). [ ? ] rpmlint output: * On -devel and SRPM packages: silent. * On main package: W: ocaml-curl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ocaml/curl/curl.cmi E: ocaml-curl only-non-binary-in-usr-lib can be ignored E: ocaml-curl no-binary --> should fix === Some commnet: === # about docs Use %doc rules instead of "cp -r examples $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name}-devel-%{version}/" ----------------- %doc examples/* ----------------- # About requires As you BuildRequired curl-devel, you should not set curl on Requires. rpmbuild should do it.
About: E: ocaml-curl no-binary I don't know how to fix this one. I asked about it on fedora-devel-list some time ago and got a response which I took to mean that I should ignore the error. Search down in the following message for "no-binary": https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-May/msg00218.html Docs & requires are fixed in these packages: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-curl-0.2.1-3.fc8.src.rpm http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-curl.spec
Right, by set it to noarch, it can be arch-specific anymore. This error can be ignored. However i think those rpmlint issues should be mentioned in OCaml Packaging Guidelines (maybe you already plan to do it :)). Well, * All other issues above has been fixed in 0.2.1-3 ========== *APPROVED* ==========
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: ocaml-curl Short Description: OCaml Curl library (ocurl) Owners: rjones Branches: F-7 InitialCC: rjones,lxtnow
cvs done.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: ocaml-curl New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: rjones dchen
Git done (by process-git-requests).