Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: MATLAB to Python syntax adapting compiler.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663181
Summary: Review Request: MATLAB to Python syntax adapting compiler. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: alevy@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: ---
Spec URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~alon/ompc.spec SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~alon/ompc-1.0beta-1.96c520b01abc.src.rpm Description: OMPC (http://ompc.juricap.com) aims to allow effortless reuse of MATLAB code from Python. OMPC is a code adaptation layer that translates MATLAB's m-files into Python compatible syntax. The generated Python compatible code depends on OMPClib which provides MATLAB compatible array interface for Python. The OMPClib interface is another numerical Python library but the only one with indexing based at 1 instead at 0, strict FORTRAN binary interface and copy on assignment.
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=663181
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: MATLAB to |Review Request: ompc - |Python syntax adapting |MATLAB to Python syntax |compiler. |adapting compiler
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=663181
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |jussi.lehtola@iki.fi AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jussi.lehtola@iki.fi Flag| |fedora-review?
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=663181
--- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2010-12-15 03:14:13 EST --- rpmlint output: ompc.src: E: invalid-version 1.0beta ompc.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C MATLAB to Python syntax adapting compiler. ompc.src: W: strange-permission ompc_gen_tarball.sh 0775L ompc.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: ompc-1.0beta-fix_compilation_for_ompc_supported.patch ompc.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch2: ompc-1.0beta-remove_ompc_pth_from_setup.patch ompc.src: W: invalid-url Source0: ompc-1.0beta.tar.bz2 ompc.x86_64: E: invalid-version 1.0beta ompc.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot C MATLAB to Python syntax adapting compiler. ompc.x86_64: E: no-binary ompc.x86_64: W: no-documentation ompc.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/test.c ompc.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/test.h ompc-debuginfo.x86_64: E: invalid-version 1.0beta ompc-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 9 warnings.
Please drop the unnecessary commented lines that remain from the python spec file template.
Tag the package as BuildArch: noarch, as it is architecture independent.
Drop the patches if you don't need them.
Get rid of the test files.
You will need to stick to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning Having the git snapshot identifier in the release is IMHO quite pointless. I'd use the date, which is a lot more understandable.
Abusive use of wildcards can lead to trouble. Avoid their use, unless absolutely necessary. For instance this package has a clearly broken install. The contents of %{python_sitelib} should be
%{python_sitelib}/ompc/ %{python_sitelib}/OMPC-*.egg-info
Currently there's a big bunch of additional stuff that in no case belongs there, such as
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/test.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/test.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/test.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/LICENSE /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/OMPC-1.0_beta-py2.7.egg-info /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/README /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses/ply /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses/ply/ANNOUNCE /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses/ply/CHANGES /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses/ply/COPYING /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses/ply/README /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/licenses/ply/TODO /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompc.cfg /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/ompceg.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/ompceg.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/ompceg.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/test.c /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompceg/test.h /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/__init__.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/__init__.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/byteplay.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/byteplay.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/byteplay.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/m_compile.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/m_compile.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/m_compile.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy_gnuplot.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy_gnuplot.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy_gnuplot.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy_platform.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy_platform.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/matpy_platform.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompc_narginout.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompc_narginout.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompc_narginout.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompc_supported.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompc_supported.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompc_supported.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_numpy.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_numpy.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_numpy.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_numpy_base.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_numpy_base.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_numpy_base.pyo /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_platform.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_platform.pyc /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ompclib/ompclib_platform.pyo
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=663181
--- Comment #2 from Alon Levy alevy@redhat.com 2010-12-15 04:51:17 EST --- Everything makes sense, just regarding the patches, I don't get the rpmlint message - I use them in %prep, and they are needed, so why doesn't rpmlint notice this? seems like an rpmlint bug. Maybe the BuildArch: noarch will "fix" that as well. I'll try.
Alon
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=663181
--- Comment #3 from Alon Levy alevy@redhat.com 2010-12-15 05:04:18 EST --- ok - had a missing space in the %patch lines. (-P 0, not -P0)
regarding the files you are absolutely right, strangely it seems the regular "python setup.py install" doesn't lead to that situation - so I'll have to look into that. If you install using "python setup.py install" you get a single directory /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/OMPC-1.0_beta-py2.7.egg/
It looks like that happens because of the egg creation and extraction that isn't happening with the default template I copied from - I'll just add that to the spec file install or build scripts.
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=663181
--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2010-12-15 05:32:30 EST --- By the way, usually one uses %patch0 -p1 %patch1 -p1 %patch2 -p1 instead of %patch -P0 -p1 %patch -P1 -p1 %patch -P2 -p1 which is more compact and IMHO also clearer.
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=663181
--- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2011-08-17 07:19:31 EDT --- Ping, what is the status of this bug?
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=663181
--- Comment #6 from Alon Levy alevy@redhat.com 2011-08-17 13:52:11 EDT --- My second attempt at a rpm package at the time, the real blocker was a problem with setup.py, I don't remember what it was unfortunately, so I'll try to give it another try, I still want to get it in.
Alon
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org