Bug 507912 - Review Request: alp - Advanced Linux Programming, Book By CodeSourcery LLC, PDF format
Review Request: alp - Advanced Linux Programming, Book By CodeSourcery LLC, P...
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:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-06-24 13:25 EDT by steve
Modified: 2010-12-17 10:22 EST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-12-17 10:22:57 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description steve 2009-06-24 13:25:12 EDT
Spec URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SPECS/alp.spec
SRPM URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SRPMS/alp-1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description:

Advanced Linux Programming is intended for the programmer already familiar with
the C programming language. Authors Alex Samuel, Jeffrey Oldham, and Mark
Mitchell of CodeSourcery, LLC take a tutorial approach and teach the most
important concepts and power features of the GNU/Linux system in application
programs.

This is the PDF version of the book as well as the example code listings
Comment 1 steve 2009-06-25 17:19:44 EDT
Made a minor change -- removed the dist tag, since it doesn't really serve any
purpose for this rpm (same as the reasoning in bz 507915). Newer spec and srpm
are at:
Spec URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SPECS/alp.spec
SRPM URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SRPMS/alp-1.0-1.src.rpm
Comment 2 steve 2009-07-02 11:18:17 EDT
Brought back the dist tag. Doesn't seem like a good idea to remove it considering the complications in building and tagging. Also, added the version to the path of the final install directory.

New spec and srpm are at:
Spec URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SPECS/alp.spec
SRPM URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SRPMS/alp-1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm
Comment 3 Michael Schwendt 2009-07-09 02:49:01 EDT
> Brought back the dist tag. Doesn't seem like a good idea to remove
> it considering the complications in building and tagging.

Well, that's not true. You would tag and build it only for the oldest dist branch and let koji inherit the builds for the newer targets. Example: You would tag and build alp-1.0-1 for F-10, and koji would make the built packages available for F-11 and devel, too. [The only minor problem is that there is no inheritence between the EPEL and Fedora targets, afaik, but in case you plan to publish this pkg for EPEL, you could simply add a version-less ".el" to the %release value.]
Comment 4 Jason Tibbitts 2009-07-09 11:21:46 EDT
Actually that requires rel-eng intervention and I find it difficult to imagine that it's worth the effort given that it provides exactly zero benefit.  We currently use a different signing key per release, so the packages end up being different anyway.  But if you want to ask rel-eng yourself, feel free.  Maybe you'll get a different answer than I did.
Comment 5 steve 2009-11-24 00:23:00 EST
Updating this review request for F11. The dist tag remains. I've found it useful now that I have packaged a couple of similar rpms (ldd-pdf and javanotes). The newer spec and src are at:

Spec URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SPECS/alp.spec
SRPM URL: http://lonetwin.net/yum/SRPMS/alp-1.0-2.fc11.src.rpm
Comment 6 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-01 16:20:31 EDT
A few comments, assuming that someone's still interested in submitting this package after so long:

The package name is pretty bad; why not something that represents the actual name of the document?

You should include several separate SourceN: urls for each section, instead of manually constructing a tarball from all of the downloads.

The license seems incorrect, since the code listings are GPL.  (I didn't check the version.)

Various lines in the spec file are unnecessary on modern Fedora (BuildRoot:, empty build section, first line of %install, and the entire %clean section on F13+).

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