[Bug 190362] New: Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

Summary: Review Request: unifdef
           Product: Fedora Extras
           Version: devel
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: normal
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]

Spec URL: http://david.woodhou.se/unifdef.spec
SRPM URL: http://david.woodhou.se/unifdef-1.171-2.src.rpm
Description:
Unifdef is useful for removing ifdefed lines from a file while otherwise
leaving the file alone. Unifdef acts on #ifdef, #ifndef, #else, and #endif
lines, and it knows only enough about C and C++ to know when one of these
is inactive because it is inside a comment, or a single or double quote.

This is already in Core for rawhide. Could do with FC4 and FC5 builds in Extras though.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|[e-mail] |[e-mail]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163779
              nThis|                            |

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-01 12:50 EST -------
Given the review done in 189937 I'm going to approve this package for Extras.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  BugsThisDependsOn|                            |189937

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-01 13:19 EST -------
Created an attachment (id=128452)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=128452&action=vie...)
unidef.spec.patch - dist tag and other minor modifications

Patch:
* adds a dist tag
* silences the setup setup (-q option)
* replaces "mkdir -p" by "install -d -m0755" 
* preserves the file timestamps (install -p)
* adds a blank line between the %setup and %build sections

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-01 16:34 EST -------
thanks. Updated specfile and src.rpm at 
 http://david.woodhou.se/unifdef.spec and
 http://david.woodhou.se/unifdef-1.171-3.src.rpm

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-01 21:02 EST -------
David,

Don't forget to update the changelog ...

$ rpmlint /home/users/fedora/rpms/RPMS/i386/unifdef-1.171-3.i386.rpm 
  W: unifdef incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.171-2 1.171-3

/jpo

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-07 12:14 EST -------
The CVS branches for FC-4 and FC-5 are still missing. 
The request must be placed here:
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-07 12:20 EST -------
Unless I was hallucinating, it _was_ added there. I added it again.

Does the Wiki let you see any more history than the one most recent change?

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-07 12:25 EST -------
Ah. I mistyped the package name as 'unidef' and Warren removed it without comment.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

[e-mail] changed:

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

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-08 00:33 EST -------
Package has been imported. Please remember to close package reviews once
accepted and imported.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|CLOSED                      |NEW
           Keywords|                            |Reopened
         Resolution|NEXTRELEASE                 |

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-10 15:54 EST -------
Re-opening this ticket until:
 * package is built for FC-4 and FC-5 (cvs branches already in place)
 * the rawhide version-release is bigger or equal to the extras VR
 * files removed from the devel branch
 * the missing changelog entry is added ;)

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-17 20:34 EST -------
David,

Could you see the last paragraphs of 
   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded
regarding the removal of the devel branch files?

TIA,
jpo

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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

Summary: Review Request: unifdef

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190362

[e-mail] changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |RAWHIDE

------- Additional Comments From [e-mail]  2006-05-17 20:39 EST -------
Removed.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

Eric Smith  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
               Flag|                            |fedora-cvs?

--- Comment #12 from Eric Smith  2010-04-07 10:47:56 EDT ---
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: unifdef
New Branches: F-13
Owners: brouhaha

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

Kevin Fenzi  changed:

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

--- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi  2010-04-07 22:17:41 EDT ---
There is already a F-13 branch.

Make sure you do a 'cvs update -d' to pick up the directories.

Feel free to reset the cvs flag if you need anything further.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

Eric Smith  changed:

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

--- Comment #14 from Eric Smith  2011-05-01 03:27:39 EDT ---
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: unifdef
New Branches: el6
Owners: brouhaha

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

--- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts  2011-05-05 11:20:11 EDT ---
Git done (by process-git-requests).

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  2011-05-09 22:24:57 EDT ---
unifdef-1.171-10.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/unifdef-1.171-10.el6

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  2011-05-27 11:12:44 EDT ---
unifdef-1.171-10.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.

[Bug 190362] Review Request: unifdef

[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=190362

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Fixed In Version|                            |unifdef-1.171-10.el6
         Resolution|RAWHIDE                     |ERRATA