Spec URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SPECS/brutus-keyring.spec SRPM URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SRPMS/brutus-keyring-0.9.0-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: Brutus Keyring is a small and simple keyring daemon with a CORBA API. It is build upon libgcrypt and should be very easy to use for client programs. It is using a symmetric cipher to store big as well as small secrets. rpmlint is silent on the srpm.
Jules, did you decide to become a fedora extras member?
No, Brian Pepple was kind enough to submit evolution-brutus on my behalf. I'm grateful for that ;-) Anyway - omesc.com is down for the moment. I'm trying to get physical access to the box but it might not be possible until Monday. So mail, svn, web and everything else is unavailable until that box is rebooted.
OK, the server is up again and the spec and srpm can be accessed.
New files to fix a small spec file syntax issue. Spec URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SPECS/brutus-keyring.spec SRPM URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SRPMS/brutus-keyring-0.9.0-2.fc7.src.rpm
Well, for 0.9.0-2: * Comments - Are the comments above Summary entry needed? I suggest to remove them * Requires - Check the Requires for -devel subpackage. Especially, check the description in libBrutusKeyringd-1.0.pc . ? Conflicts - By the way, currently Fedora's newest evolution-brutus is 1.1.26.2-2.fc7. This srpm means that Fedora's evolution-brutus has to be updated? * Documents - Please install the following ---------------------------------------------- AUTHORS ChangeLog ---------------------------------------------- - On the other hand, I suggest to remove the following ---------------------------------------------- INSTALL - This file is needed for people who want to build and install this package by themselves and is not needed for people who use rpm package. ----------------------------------------------
(In reply to comment #5) > Well, for 0.9.0-2: > > * Comments > - Are the comments above Summary entry needed? > I suggest to remove them I'm confused here. Which comments do you mean? There are a few empty lines above "Summary" in the spec file, but those are mandated by my support of other RPM based distributions (SUSE 10.2 and 10.3). > * Requires > - Check the Requires for -devel subpackage. > Especially, check the description in > libBrutusKeyringd-1.0.pc . You are right. Those requirements was different. I've added the requirements for libIDL and ORBit2 to the devel package. > ? Conflicts > - By the way, currently Fedora's newest evolution-brutus is > 1.1.26.2-2.fc7. This srpm means that Fedora's > evolution-brutus has to be updated? Yes. e-b<=1.1.28 installs brutus-keyring by itself. Separating brutus-keyring and e-b is really the right thing to do technically. I've pushed the e-b modifications to svn (svn.brutus.net) for Brian to pick up. > * Documents > - Please install the following > ---------------------------------------------- > AUTHORS > ChangeLog OK, done. > ---------------------------------------------- > - On the other hand, I suggest to remove the following > ---------------------------------------------- > INSTALL - This file is needed for people who want to > build and install this package by themselves and > is not needed for people who use rpm package. > ---------------------------------------------- OK, removed. New files here: Spec URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SPECS/brutus-keyring.spec SRPM URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SRPMS/brutus-keyring-0.9.0-3.fc7.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #6) > > ? Conflicts > > - By the way, currently Fedora's newest evolution-brutus is > > 1.1.26.2-2.fc7. This srpm means that Fedora's > > evolution-brutus has to be updated? > > Yes. e-b<=1.1.28 installs brutus-keyring by itself. This should be "e-b<1.1.28" _not_ "e-b<=1.1.28".
(In reply to comment #6) > > - Check the Requires for -devel subpackage. > > Especially, check the description in > > libBrutusKeyringd-1.0.pc . > > You are right. Those requirements was different. I've added the requirements for > libIDL and ORBit2 to the devel package. On second thoughts... the devel package require the non-devel package which require libIDL and ORBit2 so the devel package shouldn't require any of those by itself. Right?
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Well, for 0.9.0-2: > > > > * Comments > > - Are the comments above Summary entry needed? > > I suggest to remove them > > I'm confused here. Which comments do you mean? > There are a few empty lines above > "Summary" in the spec file, but those are mandated by my support of other RPM > based distributions (SUSE 10.2 and 10.3). - What I meant here is the parts of ------------------------------------------------ # RPM spec file for the Brutus Keyring. # Copyright (C) 2007 OMC Denmark ApS <snip> # Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, # MA 02111-1307 USA # ------------------------------------------------ (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #6) > > > - Check the Requires for -devel subpackage. > > > Especially, check the description in > > > libBrutusKeyringd-1.0.pc . > > > On second thoughts... the devel package require the non-devel package which > require libIDL and ORBit2 so the devel package shouldn't > require any of those by > itself. Right? - The point is not there. /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libBrutusKeyringd-1.0.pc contains the line: --------------------------------------------------- Requires: libIDL-2.0 >= 0.8.5, ORBit-2.0 >= 2.14.1 --------------------------------------------------- This means that brutus-keyring-devel must have "Requires: ORBit2*-devel*" (and /usr/include/brutus-keyring-1.0/brutus-keyring.h also requires ORBit2-devel) (the dependency for ORBit2 is automatically pulled).
Ahh, I see. New files here: Spec URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SPECS/brutus-keyring.spec SRPM URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SRPMS/brutus-keyring-0.9.0-4.fc7.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #6) > > (In reply to comment #5) > > > Well, for 0.9.0-2: > > > > > > * Comments > > > - Are the comments above Summary entry needed? > > > I suggest to remove them > > > > I'm confused here. Which comments do you mean? > > There are a few empty lines above > > "Summary" in the spec file, but those are mandated by my support of other RPM > > based distributions (SUSE 10.2 and 10.3). > - What I meant here is the parts of > ------------------------------------------------ > # RPM spec file for the Brutus Keyring. > # Copyright (C) 2007 OMC Denmark ApS > <snip> > # Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, > # MA 02111-1307 USA > # > ------------------------------------------------ So I should remove the more or less standard GPL license notice?
Usually Fedora's spec files does not contain such license comments.
No, I've noticed that, but I would really like to keep the header if it isn't to annoying. It is not a matter of being a legalese nitpicker. I just prefer to have a license notice on the top of each and every file (except for the really insignificant ones) to avoid any possible legal ambiguities. I'll certainly remove it if it is a problem, but I would rather keep the license notice if possible.
(In reply to comment #13) > No, I've noticed that, but I would really like to keep > the header if it isn't to annoying. Well, okay. I don't force you to remove them. ----------------------------------------------- Requires: ORBit2*-devel* ----------------------------------------------- - Oops.. I just wanted to emphasize "-devel". The name is "ORBit2-devel". Sorry for confusing you.. - By the way did you modify the Source tarball itself silently?
(In reply to comment #14) > (In reply to comment #13) > > No, I've noticed that, but I would really like to keep > > the header if it isn't to annoying. > > Well, okay. I don't force you to remove them. Thanks :-) > ----------------------------------------------- > Requires: ORBit2*-devel* > ----------------------------------------------- > - Oops.. I just wanted to emphasize "-devel". > The name is "ORBit2-devel". Sorry for confusing you.. Silly me... > - By the way did you modify the Source tarball itself silently? Sigh, yes. The spec file revision number didn't make it to the tar-ball version string. I've now changed my ways and will increase the third version digit for each spec file modification so that any source change will be reflected by the tar-ball version. New files here: Spec URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SPECS/brutus-keyring.spec SRPM URL: http://www.omesc.com/sites/default/files/downloads/dist/brutus-keyring/Fedora%207/SRPMS/brutus-keyring-0.9.1-1.fc7.src.rpm
Okay. --------------------------------------------------- This package (brutus-keyring) is APPROVED by me ---------------------------------------------------
Great - thanks a lot!
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: brutus-keyring Short Description: small keyring daemon build upon libgcrypt Owners: bdpepple Branches: F-7 InitialCC: colding
cvs done.
Please try to import this to Fedora.
Anything I can do to help?
I'm planning to do this on Monday, since I'm still on vacation.
(In reply to comment #22) > I'm planning to do this on Monday, since I'm still on vacation. Ah, okay, thank you.
Please close this bug when rebuild is done.
Hi again, I've just returned from a two week vacation. The vacation was involuntary mail-less and I won't get a chance to access my inbox until Monday. Has there been any build issues or other problems, that has gone directly to my mail address instead of bugzilla, that I should take care of? Best regards, jules
(In reply to comment #25) > Has there been any build issues or other problems, that has gone directly to my > mail address instead of bugzilla, that I should take care of? > Well, as you cannot rebuild this on Fedora, I am asking to Brian.
I was able to build brutus-keyring fine, but updating evolution-brutus to 1.1.28.0 is proving to be quite problematic. jules, I sent you an e-mail about it, and hopefully this weekend I'll have some time to track down the problem.
OK, I'll read the mail as soon as I hit the office, which should be Monday morning. evolution-brutus-1.1.28.0 should build fine, but that is naturally on my box. I'll fix whatever is wrong asap on Monday. Thanks, jules
Ok, finally got Evolution-Brutus to build in rawhide. yeah. Thanks for the review, Mamoru.