Spec URL: http://mef.fedorapeople.org/packages/java-libraries/cglib.spec
SRPM URL: http://mef.fedorapeople.org/packages/java-libraries/cglib-2.2-1.src.rpm
cglib is a powerful, high performance and quality code generation library
for Java. It is used to extend Java classes and implements interfaces
Note: This package is loosely based on an existing JPackage package by Ralf Apel.
Updated spec, now builds properly in mock and is rpmlint clean.
I haven't done Java packages, but you should probably make /etc/maven/fragments/cglib a %conf. rpmlint warns:
cglib.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/cglib
Updated to flag maven depmap as "config" and to explain the purpose of the patch
Small update to include the dist in the version
Oops, the URL was wrong above. Note that I've also changed to use the latest greatest BuildRoot:
Can you use cglib 2.1.3 instead? The 2.2 will conflict with things like Hibernate, JBoss AS etc.
In the meanwhile, I am contacting the communities mentioned above to check if they could certify their software with a cglib 2.2 as well.
Oops, I now notice that cglib 2.1.3 is already in jpackage:
What's the procedure for importing that into Fedora?
After a bit of further investigation, it seems that cglib 2.1.3 depends on a very old version of objectweb-asm. Fedora currently has packages for objectweb-asm (=version 3.1, October 2007) and asm2 (=version 2.2.3, April 2006), but cglib 2.1.3 depends on classes last defined in asm version 1.5.3, which was released in November 2004.
jpackage has a package for asm version 1.5.3 which could probably be imported quite easily as "asm1" or the like:
It's not very satisfying to be packaging all of these old libraries, though ... :)
JPackage.org will soon have a cglib22 package with cglib 2.2 (which uses the objectweb-asm 3.0) package. Interested? Can you use cglib 2.2 in place of 2.1.3?
I'd certainly prefer cglib 2.2 -- when the jpackage package appears, will/can a jpackage person submit it to Fedora or should I do that?
So, nearly six months later, what is the status of this ticket?
No response; closing.
I'm not sure why was this closed, did it get stalled due to lack of reviewers? If it is the case, I can review this (and in any case, you can always mail fedora-devel-list or join #fedora-devel channel at freenode to find someone to review your packages, or exchange a review with someone else).
Mary, do you still plan getting this in? Please open a new ticket with current package or let me know if you no longer need the package.
Review resubmitted here: bug #537066
Mary, feel free to steal the ticket/package if you like, I'd be happy if you maintained it.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 537066 ***