I'm trying to make the first build of an approved package (kpmcore), I've imported the .src.rpm, but the build in rawhide fails (without giving me a lot of information...): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12012584
The strange is scratch-build works: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12012451
What's wrong with that?
... my fault. The package name (and the .spec file) is set to "kpmcore", while the review request and PackageDB are set to "KPMcore"...
Should I retire in PackageDB and then redo the request package process? Can I use the same review request by renaming it or I must do a new one?
Il 29/11/2015 18:21, Mattia Verga ha scritto:
I'm trying to make the first build of an approved package (kpmcore), I've imported the .src.rpm, but the build in rawhide fails (without giving me a lot of information...): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12012584
The strange is scratch-build works: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12012451
What's wrong with that?
devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Solved by changing .spec file name as set in PackageDB.
The developer himself uses both kpmcore and KPMcore in the project, so I think there's no problem in adopting KPMcore as name in Fedora.
Sorry for the noise.
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 19:10:25 +0100, Mattia Verga wrote:
Solved by changing .spec file name as set in PackageDB.
The developer himself uses both kpmcore and KPMcore in the project, so I think there's no problem in adopting KPMcore as name in Fedora.
Sorry for the noise.
Both https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Spec_File_Naming and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming apply.
And it can be quite tiresome, if such issues come up during review.
On 29/11/15 18:18, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 19:10:25 +0100, Mattia Verga wrote:
Solved by changing .spec file name as set in PackageDB.
The developer himself uses both kpmcore and KPMcore in the project, so I think there's no problem in adopting KPMcore as name in Fedora.
Sorry for the noise.
Both https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Spec_File_Naming and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming apply.
And it can be quite tiresome, if such issues come up during review.
Yes, as the reviewer in this case I would definitely have objected to a mixed case name on the basis of the guidelines.
Of course the spec file I was reviewing wasn't mixed case and I didn't notice that the bug title was different.
It always used to be the case that the request for a package to be added to pkgdb was rejected if the title didn't match, so has a bug been introduced there by the new pkgdb process?
Tom
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 18:50:22 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote:
It always used to be the case that the request for a package to be added to pkgdb was rejected if the title didn't match,
True. For a long time, reviewers have adjusted the bug title during review because of that.
so has a bug been introduced there by the new pkgdb process?
That's likely. Considering that a completely unreviewed package (lacking fedora-review+ flag even) has been approved recently, I guess there are some problems in the process.
All that's IMHO.
-
Mattia Verga -
Michael Schwendt -
Tom Hughes