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=225301
Summary: Merge Review: automake17 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nobody@fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com CC: karsten@redhat.com
Fedora Merge Review: automake17
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/automake17/
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-02-20 12:04 EST ------- automake17-1.7.9-8 has quite a few fixes, although self checks are currently disabled. I need to look at some failures when I have spare time.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From rc040203@freenet.de 2007-02-20 13:32 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1)
automake17-1.7.9-8 has quite a few fixes, although self checks are currently disabled. I need to look at some failures when I have spare time.
Frankly speaking, I would not apply any fixes, but ship a plain vanilla FSF automake. automake-1.7.x is dead for years and anybody still using it deserves to feel the pain.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-02-20 15:37 EST ------- Whoops, maybe we should continue in German to avoid misunderstandings ;-)
Fixes are only in the spec file, there's only one patch for the self checks, but those are currently disabled.
Gruesse aus Stuttgart...
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
karsten@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag| |needinfo?(rc040203@freenet.d | |e)
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-03-13 11:33 EST ------- what's the review status here ? Is it approved ?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium
karsten@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(rc040203@freenet.d|needinfo?(nobody@fedoraproje |e) |ct.org)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2007-09-14 16:41 EST ------- The Conflict should certainly be an obsolete. And maybe an Obsolete for 1.7.9?
Seems that the texinfo-tex BR is needed for a test? It should be said so in a comment.
The BR autoconf is needed. It is a bit strange in my opinion, but it is upstream choice.
License is wrong.
README AUTHORS THANKS missing in %doc
Also a comment for ./configure should be nice.
And lastly it would be nice to have the info file available. I can try a patch for that if you want to.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2007-09-14 16:48 EST ------- In fact the Conflict is certainly right. But the Obsolete should certainly be added.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
karsten@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |pertusus@free.fr Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-09-17 08:07 EST ------- fixed in automake17-1.7.9-9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
pertusus@free.fr changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(nobody@fedoraproje| |ct.org) |
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2007-09-17 17:12 EST ------- I think that the Obsoletes should be with Obsoletes: automake = 1.7.9
I have checked that when rerunning automake-1.7, the Makefile.in files are not the same, in the new ones there are other variables. But those variables look suspiciously like variables introduced in recent automake (1.9 or 1.10). So it is certainly right as is.
The check part should be in a %check section. Currently it is in comment, but it would certainly be better to put a #%check at the beginning of the comments, or even %check to avoid forgetting.
I still don't see any file under the MIT license.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-09-18 09:15 EST ------- /usr/share/automake-1.7/install-sh is MIT afaik. I've fixed the Obsoletes version
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-09-18 10:06 EST ------- Stepan Kasal suggested using checking for versions < 1.8 to catch all upgrades from automake-1.7.*. It would also match if automake-1.6.* is still installed, but that should be replaced by automake16 anyhow.
Something like Conflicts: automake < 1.8 Obsoletes: automake < 1.8
would disallow concurrent installation of automake17 with automake-1.6.* as well as automake-1.7.* but allows installation of automake16 and automake17. I think I'll change it accoring to his suggestions.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2007-09-18 15:03 EST ------- (In reply to comment #10)
Stepan Kasal suggested using checking for versions < 1.8 to catch all upgrades from automake-1.7.*. It would also match if automake-1.6.* is still installed, but that should be replaced by automake16 anyhow.
Something like Conflicts: automake < 1.8 Obsoletes: automake < 1.8
The Conflict is not useful, since the Obsolete will cause the older automake to be removed.
would disallow concurrent installation of automake17 with automake-1.6.* as well as automake-1.7.* but allows installation of automake16 and automake17. I think I'll change it accoring to his suggestions.
But then if you have automake-1.6.3 installed, you have 2 package that obsolete it, automake16 and automake17. I am not sure that it is right. Maybe Obsoletes: automake = 1.7.1, automake = 1.7.2, automake = 1.7.3 Obsoletes: automake = 1.7.4, automake = 1.7.5, automake = 1.7.6 Obsoletes: automake = 1.7.7, automake = 1.7.8, automake = 1.7.9
It is ugly, but may be more correct.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2007-09-18 15:07 EST ------- (In reply to comment #9)
/usr/share/automake-1.7/install-sh is MIT afaik.
Very true. A comment would be nice, in my opinion. Not a blocker.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From karsten@redhat.com 2007-09-19 08:56 EST ------- a conflict makes sure that you can install automake-1.7 when automake17 is installed. AFAIK rpm currently allows this.
I'd rather not go the road with the multiple obsoletes. I think using < 1.8 is as simple and clear as rpm currently allows. If someone uses an ancient automake version, I'm quite sure he/she knows how to install it. This doesn't concern users of FC-2 and newer as they already have automake17 and not automake-1.7, so I'd like to keep it like it currently is.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2007-09-19 09:51 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13)
a conflict makes sure that you can install automake-1.7 when automake17 is installed. AFAIK rpm currently allows this.
Indeed (although in that case there will certainly be a file conflict). But since it is obsoleted this is not useful since the automake-1.7 will be removed in normal cases. Conflicts should be avoided, but I won't make it a blocker. However, it shouldn't conflict with anything else than 1.7*.
I'd rather not go the road with the multiple obsoletes. I think using < 1.8 is as simple and clear as rpm currently allows. If someone uses an ancient automake version, I'm quite sure he/she knows how to install it.
But it renders the Obsoletes of 1.6 by 16 unusefull. And are you sure that the right version gets installed when there are multiple Obsoletes? It is not that clear. Obsoleting only 1.7.9 is clearer as it means that it simply was a rename. And your argument holds if there is only Obsoletes: 1.7.9 If someone uses an ancient automake version, I'm quite sure he/she knows how to install it.
This doesn't concern users of FC-2 and newer as they already have automake17 and
I don't think that we should target some users, but try to do as right as possible for those who have old automake versions installed, whatever version it is. In any case, this is not very important since the users who want to do such upgrades and keep compat packages are likely to be knowledgable, but in any case we should do the best we can.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide
kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review?
------- Additional Comments From kevin@tummy.com 2008-03-02 13:45 EST ------- Patrice: Are you reviewing this? It seems so, so I am setting fedora-review: ? If not, feel free to reset and unassign.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: automake17
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225301
pertusus@free.fr changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|pertusus@free.fr |nobody@fedoraproject.org Flag|fedora-review? |
------- Additional Comments From pertusus@free.fr 2008-03-02 16:22 EST ------- Resetting and unnassigning since I am in disagreement with the packager and I won't approve the Obsoletes < 1.8.
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=225301
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
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=225301
Karsten Hopp karsten@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |WONTFIX Last Closed| |2012-02-29 09:16:45
--- Comment #17 from Karsten Hopp karsten@redhat.com 2012-02-29 09:16:45 EST --- I'll close this as noone seems to care
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla