7:23 a.m.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727543
Summary: jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: Unspecified
OS/Version: Unspecified
Status: NEW
Severity: unspecified
Priority: unspecified
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: mmorsi(a)redhat.com
QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: notting(a)redhat.com,
package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Type: ---
Spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-ffi.spec
SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-ffi-0.5.10-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description:
Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
Obsoletes jaffl. Required by JRuby.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3246435
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
7:25 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Mo Morsi <mmorsi(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |723191
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
1:02 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |akurtako(a)redhat.com
AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |akurtako(a)redhat.com
Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-09 02:02:05 EDT
---
I would do this one.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
1:17 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-09 02:17:42 EDT
---
Few initial problems:
* License is wrong - ASL 2.0 in the source but LGPLv3 in the spec
* rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT as first line of install section is no longer needed
* clean section is no longer needed
* versioned jars are installed, please install only unversioned one
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Filenames
* %defattr(-,root,root,-) are no longer needed
* do not install versioned javadoc folder
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Javadoc_installation
* post/postun %update_maven_depmap are no longer needed
* %add_to_maven_depmap is used but it's deprecated now please use
%add_maven_depmap JPP-%{name}.pom %{name}.jar quite simple and validates you're
doing the right thing
* Do not BuildRequires: ant-nodeps it has been merged into main ant package
Question:
* Do we need the changelog from jaffl at all? For me it only makes the spec
bigger but it's up to you
Once the listed problems are fixed I'll do the formal review
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
1:22 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-09 02:22:23 EDT
---
Oh and I forgot to say please make the Obsoletes/Provides versioned
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
3:46 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #4 from Mo Morsi <mmorsi(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-10 16:46:20 EDT ---
Updated spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-ffi.spec
Updated SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-ffi-0.5.10-2.fc14.src.rpm
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3264801
(In reply to comment #2)
Few initial problems:
* License is wrong - ASL 2.0 in the source but LGPLv3 in the spec
Project is dual licensed under the ASL and LGPLv3+, license field has been
updated to reflect this
* rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT as first line of install section is no
longer needed
* clean section is no longer needed
Both are done
* versioned jars are installed, please install only unversioned one
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Filenames
* %defattr(-,root,root,-) are no longer needed
* do not install versioned javadoc folder
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Javadoc_installation
As are these three.
* post/postun %update_maven_depmap are no longer needed
Done
* %add_to_maven_depmap is used but it's deprecated now please
use
%add_maven_depmap JPP-%{name}.pom %{name}.jar quite simple and validates you're
doing the right thing
When I change this I get the following error:
+ %add_maven_depmap JPP-jnr-ffi.pom jnr-ffi.jar
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Vqrru5: line 38: fg: no job control
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Vqrru5 (%install)
Thoughts?
* Do not BuildRequires: ant-nodeps it has been merged into main ant
package
Done
Question:
* Do we need the changelog from jaffl at all? For me it only makes the spec
bigger but it's up to you
Truncated these extra bits
(In reply to comment #3)
Oh and I forgot to say please make the Obsoletes/Provides versioned
Done (believe I did this correctly though would like verification).
Thanks for the review.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
5:34 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-15 06:34:07 EDT
---
Package Review
==============
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASLv2 and LGPLv3+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[!] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
Is the jaffl-0.5.jar really needed?
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[!] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven.local.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
=== Issues ===
1. Is the jaffl-0.5.jar really needed? I would prefer if we kill versioned jars
entirely but it's up to you.
2. add_maven_depmap looks for the pom file and reads it so it has to be
installed before calling the macro
3. Please put the release in provides/obsoletes too
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
8:21 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #6 from Mo Morsi <mmorsi(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-23 21:21:30 EDT ---
Updated spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-ffi.spec
Updated SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc14.src.rpm
=== Issues ===
1. Is the jaffl-0.5.jar really needed? I would prefer if we kill versioned jars
entirely but it's up to you.
Removed
2. add_maven_depmap looks for the pom file and reads it so it has to
be
installed before calling the macro
I understand your point, but once again when I add the suggested invocation of
the %add_maven_depmap macro, I get
+ %add_maven_depmap JPP-jnr-ffi.pom
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.eT91Tn: line 48: fg: no job control
Even if the macro is called after the pom is installed (see commented location
in spec file). Please advise on correct way to proceed w/out error.
3. Please put the release in provides/obsoletes too
Done
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
1:17 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-24 02:17:18 EDT
---
Thanks, I would not block on the add_maven_depmap usage. I didn't thought about
that but what version of jpackage-utils do you have? Is it failing in mock on
rawhide? Most probably you have too old jpackage-utils that doesn't have it.
Anyway,
This package is APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:37 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Mo Morsi <mmorsi(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #8 from Mo Morsi <mmorsi(a)redhat.com> 2011-08-24 11:37:22 EDT ---
Thanks for the review, the version of jpackage-utils that I have locally is
jpackage-utils-1.7.5-3.11.fc14.noarch according to rpm (yum update
jpackage-utils turns up nothing as well).
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: jnr-ffi
Short Description: Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
Owners: mmorsi
Branches: f15 f16
InitialCC:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:40 a.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla <limb(a)jcomserv.net> 2011-08-24 11:40:32 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
2:20 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
2:20 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-08-24
15:20:48 EDT ---
jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc15
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
2:20 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-08-24
15:20:59 EDT ---
jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc16
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
5:46 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-08-24
18:46:48 EDT ---
jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
7:14 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-09-06
20:13:59 EDT ---
jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
7:14 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Fixed In Version| |jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc15
Resolution| |ERRATA
Last Closed| |2011-09-06 20:14:05
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:42 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> 2011-09-06
23:42:59 EDT ---
jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
10:43 p.m.
New subject: [Bug 727543] jnr-ffi - Java Abstracted Foreign Function Layer
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=727543
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed In Version|jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc15 |jnr-ffi-0.5.10-3.fc16
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
4672
days inactive
4708
days old
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
18 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Red Hat Bugzilla