Bug 491617 (mingw32-libxml++) - Review Request: mingw32-libxml++ - MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2
Summary: Review Request: mingw32-libxml++ - MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2
Alias: mingw32-libxml++
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Kalev Lember
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On: mingw32-glibmm24
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2009-03-23 11:11 UTC by Thomas Sailer
Modified: 2009-05-09 04:04 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 2.26.0-1.fc11
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2009-04-22 00:48:51 UTC
kalevlember: fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Thomas Sailer 2009-03-23 11:11:45 UTC
Spec URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libxml++.spec
SRPM URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libxml++-2.24.2-3.fc11.src.rpm
MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2.

Approved MinGW packaging guidelines are here:

Comment 1 Kalev Lember 2009-03-24 17:47:54 UTC
This package needs mingw32-glibmm24, which isn't included in Fedora and has to be submitted for review first.

Besides that, you'll also need:
BuildRequires: mingw32-gcc-c++

and pkgconfig because you have libxml++-2.6.pc in the package:
Requires: pkgconfig

Examples, manual, and reference shouldn't be included in the package because they duplicate docs in the native Fedora package.

Comment 2 Thomas Sailer 2009-03-25 09:32:24 UTC
You are right, mingw32-glibmm24 should go in first, I unfortunately noticed this only after submitting the review request.

Thank you for your intial review comments, I updated the package according to your comments:

Comment 3 Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-25 10:13:00 UTC
Please note that we have packaged mingw32-glibmm24:
It needs to be turned into a Review Request.

Comment 4 Kalev Lember 2009-04-16 19:52:15 UTC
mingw32-glibmm24 is now in Fedora and we can go on with this review.

- In Rawhide the native Fedora libxml++ package has been updated to 2.26.0, and
according to MinGW packaging guidelines the versions should match native
package if possible.

- Please clean up the %install section. It only makes the spec file unreadable if most of a section contains leftovers that aren't actually used.

- Removing *.a in %install section only matches the (needed) import library, because static libraries aren't built (configure --disable-static). It seems unnecessary to first delete the import lib and then manually copy it over from .libs.

Comment 5 Thomas Sailer 2009-04-17 07:46:49 UTC

I removed the docs cruft...

Spec URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libxml++.spec
SRPM URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.src.rpm

Comment 6 Kalev Lember 2009-04-17 10:50:09 UTC
Koji scratch build:

Rpmlint is quiet:
$ rpmlint mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Comment 7 Kalev Lember 2009-04-17 11:36:17 UTC
Fedora review mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.src.rpm 2008-04-17

+ OK
! needs attention

+ rpmlint output
+ Package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ Specfile name matches the package base name
+ Package follows the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ License meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ License matches the actual package license
  It is also the same as in the corresponding Fedora libxml++ package
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm
a52fc7e6e44bb5cc187672930b843f72  libxml++-2.26.0.tar.bz2
a52fc7e6e44bb5cc187672930b843f72  SRPM/libxml++-2.26.0.tar.bz2

+ Package builds in mock (Fedora Rawhide i586)
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ Does not use Prefix: /usr
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ %files has %defattr
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Consistent use of macros
+ Package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel
    Fedora MinGW guidelines allow headers in main package
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
+ Packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files
    Fedora MinGW guidelines allow .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Filenames must be valid UTF-8

After the %install cleanup dos2unix is no longer needed in BuildRequires, but that can be fixed without having to send an updated version for me to approve.


Comment 8 Thomas Sailer 2009-04-17 11:50:10 UTC
New Package CVS Request
Package Name: mingw32-libxml++
Short Description: MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2
Owners: sailer rjones
Branches: F-10 F-11

Comment 9 Kevin Fenzi 2009-04-17 16:40:19 UTC
cvs done.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2009-04-17 20:59:00 UTC
mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2009-04-17 20:59:42 UTC
mingw32-libxml++-2.24.2-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2009-04-22 00:48:46 UTC
mingw32-libxml++-2.24.2-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2009-05-09 04:04:22 UTC
mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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