[Bug 1107441] Review Request: udt - UDP based Data Transfer Protocol

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1107441



--- Comment #10 from Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert at fysast.uu.se> ---
(In reply to Björn "besser82" Esser from comment #7)
> Good work, Flo! There are just two small things I want to mention,
> additionally:
> 
> [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
>      Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in udt-devel
> 
>      ---> please fix up the requires of the -devel-subpkg.

This is already there. I suspect you were confused by the requires as reported
by fedora-review. This tool fails to report versions in the requires. It does
the check for it properly, and complains if it is not there (and there were no
complaint in this case). But the list it displays is a bit confusing because it
does not contain the versions. Someone should probably file a bug report to
fedora-review about this.

> [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
> 
>      ---> `sed 's/\r//' -i doc/doc/udtdoc.css` doesn't preseve the timestamp
>           of that particular file with will be packaged in -devel.  ;)
> 
>           Using something like this would be better by the meaning of
> preserving
>           the file's timestamp:
> 
>           _file="doc/doc/udtdoc.css"
>           sed -e 's!\r$!!g' < ${_file} > ${_file}.new && \
>           touch -r ${_file} ${_file}.new && \
>           mv -f ${_file}.new ${_file}

The file that is installed is not the original file since it is modified, so
giving the modified file the timestamp of the original seems a bit strange.
That would give the impression that it is the original file that is installed.
If I would do a similar fix using a %patch I would not be able to do that
anyway, and it seems strange to do different things with the timestamps
depending on how the file was modified.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Rpmlint_Errors

says "Fix it in the %prep section with sed: sed -i 's/\r//' src/somefile"

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding

gives the same advise.

(In reply to Björn "besser82" Esser from comment #8)
> btw. The branch used for building EPEL-pkg for rhel / CentOS 7 is called
> 'epel7'.  ;)  I just fixed your scm-request, Matthias. ^^

Thank you.
PS. You keep adding an h in my name)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component