[Bug 597709] New: Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Summary: Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version
                    of ncurses gem
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
    Classification: Fedora
    Target Release: ---

Spec URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw.spec
SRPM URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw-1.2.4....
Description: Hacked up version of ncurses gem that supports wide characters and
ruby1.9.1. Original ncurses gem by [e-mail]. Spec and SRPM
built using gem2rpm utility.

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Shreyank Gupta  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #1 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-05-30 07:35:31 EDT ---
rpmlint output is :
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: no-soname
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/lib/ncursesw_bin.so
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ncursesw_bin.so
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/form_wrap.c
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unexpanded-macro
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ri/Ncurses/Destroy_checker/destroyed%3f-i.yaml
%3f
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/menu_wrap.h
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unexpanded-macro
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ri/Ncurses/Menu/MENU/user_object%3d-i.yaml
%3d
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/menu_wrap.c
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/panel_wrap.c
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unexpanded-macro
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ri/Ncurses/Form/FORM/user_object%3d-i.yaml
%3d
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ncurses_wrap.c
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/form_wrap.h
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ncurses_wrap.h
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unexpanded-macro
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ri/Ncurses/Menu/ITEM/user_object%3d-i.yaml
%3d
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unexpanded-macro
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ri/Ncurses/Form/FIELD/user_object%3d-i.yaml
%3d
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: unexpanded-macro
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ri/Ncurses/WINDOW/respond_to%3f-i.yaml
%3f
rubygem-ncursesw.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/panel_wrap.h

---

1. Do I split the the files into a devel subpackage?
2. How do i solve the 'unstripped-binary-or-object' problem?

---
koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2217882

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #2 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-05-31 10:58:16 EDT ---
Updated spec and srpm, replaced %define with %global

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-05-31 14:19:22 EDT ---
Some notes:

Please also address the issue I wrote on bug 598138.
Then:

* Summary
  - Is "and ruby 1.9.1" part needed for Summary? (even if
    we move to ruby 1.9.x on F-14, I don't think this part
    is needed).

* License
  - The license tag for this package should be "LGPLv2+".

* Unneeded files
  - *.c, *.h files are for source files for C extension .so file,
    *.o binary files are used for generating the file.
    Also "extconf.rb" is like configure, and "mkmf.log" is like
    config.log.
    These files are not needed on runtime and should not be packaged
    into binary rpm.

* Arch dependent binary file
  - C extension .so file is arch-dependent and must be moved
    to under %ruby_sitearch

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Build_Architecture_and_File_Pl...

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #4 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-01 12:04:49 EDT ---
UPDATED:
--------

Spec URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw.spec
SRPM URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw-1.2.4....

Notes/doubts:
------

* Removed 'and ruby 1.9.1' from the summary.
* rm -f all .c .o and .h files as I was not sure whether to %exclude it or not.
* There are two .so files, one inside and one outside the lib directory. Put
the lib one inside ruby_sitearch and removed the other one.
* Added examples as a part of the -docs subpackage. Is that the right thing to
do?

Koji scratch build:
-------------------

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2222741

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-01 14:41:06 EDT ---
For -2:

* For
  - Directory ownership of %geminstdir, %gemdir/doc,
    and "Changes THANKS TODO VERSION", please my comments
    on bug 598138.

* Examples
  - For example,
-------------------------------------------------------
$ ruby -rubygems ./examples/tclock.rb 
/usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in
`gem_original_require': no such file to load -- ncurses (LoadError)
 from /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in `require'
 from ./examples/tclock.rb:33
-------------------------------------------------------
    Actually these example files (in -doc subpackage) all has
    'require ncurses(.rb)', however actually the installed ruby
    script (in main package) is "ncursesw.rb".

So these example files should be modified as such (I am not sure
    if we can create symlink as "ncurses.rb -> ncursesw.rb", because
    there is another "ncurses-0.9.1.gem" actually - although ncurses.gem
    seems the older version of ncursesw.gem)

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #6 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-02 08:56:09 EDT ---
UPDATED:
--------

Spec URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw.spec
SRPM URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw-1.2.4....

Notes:
------

I ran sed and replaced all require 'ncurses' to require 'ncursesw'.
HTH

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)      |

--- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-03 04:26:18 EDT ---
(removing NEEDSPONSOR)

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Shreyank Gupta  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]

--- Comment #8 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-03 10:49:30 EDT ---
Koji Scratch build:
--------------------

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2227505

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-03 15:36:38 EDT ---
2 issues

* rpmlint issue for -debuginfo rpm related
--------------------------------------------------------------
rubygem-ncursesw-debuginfo.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/rubygem-ncursesw-1.2.4.1/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/ncurses_wrap.c
rubygem-ncursesw-debuginfo.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/rubygem-ncursesw-1.2.4.1/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ncursesw-1.2.4.1/panel_wrap.h
--------------------------------------------------------------
  - To avoid this rpmlint complaint, please add below at the end
    of %build:
--------------------------------------------------------------
pushd ./%{geminstdir}
chmod 0644 *.h *.c
popd
--------------------------------------------------------------

* License
  - Please change the license tag on -doc subpacakge to
    "LGPLv2+ and LDPL"
    ref:
    http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/legal/2010-June/001290.html

Please fix the above issue when importing this package into
Fedora CVS.

--------------------------------------------------------------
    This package (rubygem-ncursesw) is APPROVED by mtasaka
--------------------------------------------------------------

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #10 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-04 08:18:13 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: rubygem-ncursesw
Short Description: Hacked up version of ncurses gem
Owners: shreyankg
Branches: F-13

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #11 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-04 08:45:18 EDT ---
UPDATED:
--------

Spec URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw.spec
SRPM URL:
http://shreyankg.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ncursesw/rubygem-ncursesw-1.2.4....

Notes:
------

rpmlint gives the following warning on the -doc rpm:

W: invalid-license LDPL

So I filed bug #600317 with rpmlint to correct it.

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-04 10:07:49 EDT ---
Please set fedora-cvs flag to ?.

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Shreyank Gupta  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-cvs?

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #13 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-04 10:21:39 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Please set fedora-cvs flag to ?.

I'm sorry! :-)

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review+, fedora-cvs? |fedora-review?

--- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-04 13:50:50 EDT ---
Ah... sorry, wait.

I just noticed that Fedora already includes ruby-ncurses and
the upstream of both ruby-ncurses and rubygem-ncursesw is the same.

Would you first contact ruby-ncurses's maintainer to discuss
which should be kept in Fedora distrubution?

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-04 13:52:07 EDT ---
ref:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/ruby-ncurses
maintainer: slukasik _at_ redhat.com

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #16 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-07 05:53:02 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Ah... sorry, wait.
>
> I just noticed that Fedora already includes ruby-ncurses and
> the upstream of both ruby-ncurses and rubygem-ncursesw is the same.

The point of filing a rewiew request for rubygem-ncursesw is that it is one of
the dependencies for sup 0.10.2 (http://rubyforge.org/projects/sup/), which I
want to package for Fedora, but cannot do so until all its dependencies are in
Fedora.

The thing is the latest development version of sup (0.11) uses ruby-ncurses,
but that is quite unstable.

Since rubygem-ncursesw is required for sup-0.10.2 I would like it packaged
temporarily, and I would obsolete this package once I package sup-0.11

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #17 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-07 11:43:42 EDT ---
Well, if currently you are only considering of importing packages
which sup depends on, and under the current condition that
ruby-ncurses is already in Fedora, then this package is not needed
even for 0.10.2 (as far I checked the source code)

For example sup-0.10.2/bin/sup contains:
-------------------------------------------------------
     5  no_ncursesw = false
     6  begin
     7    require 'ncursesw'
     8  rescue LoadError
     9    require 'ncurses'
    10    no_ncursesw = true
    11  end
-------------------------------------------------------
so sup falls back to using ncurses if ncursesw is not found.

So if you are not interested in maintaining ncursesw once
sup 0.11 is released, currently I am against importing this
package into Fedora.

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

--- Comment #18 from Shreyank Gupta  2010-06-07 13:03:45 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
[..]
> So if you are not interested in maintaining ncursesw once
> sup 0.11 is released, currently I am against importing this
> package into Fedora.

Alright then, I guess we can close this request unless required later.

[Bug 597709] Review Request: rubygem-ncursesw - Hacked up version of ncurses gem

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597709

Mamoru Tasaka  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |NOTABUG

--- Comment #19 from Mamoru Tasaka  2010-06-07 13:53:21 EDT ---
Okay, once closing as I think even sup-0.10.2 does not require
ncursesw (provided that ruby-ncurses is available).

If it is found that this package is needed, please reopen this bug
(or file a new review request).