[Bug 1183191] New: Review Request: ocaml-cudf - Common Upgradeability Description Format (CUDF) library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
Bug ID: 1183191 Summary: Review Request: ocaml-cudf - Common Upgradeability Description Format (CUDF) library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jon@recoil.org QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf.spec SRPM URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf-0.7-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: CUDF (for Common Upgradeability Description Format) is a format for describing upgrade scenarios in package-based Free and Open Source Software distribution.
libCUDF is a library to manipulate so called CUDF documents. A CUDF document describe an upgrade problem, as faced by package managers in popular package-based GNU/Linux distributions.
Fedora Account System Username: jonludlam
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
--- Comment #1 from Jon Ludlam jon@recoil.org --- koji link: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8647847
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ludlam jon@recoil.org --- I noticed that I have accidentally included the .o files into the main package. However, on removing these, I now have a hard error:
ocaml-cudf.x86_64: E: no-binary
I'm not convinced this is a real error though - the package contents are now:
/usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/META /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf.cma /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_822_lexer.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_822_parser.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_c.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_checker.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_conf.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_parser.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_printer.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_type_lexer.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_type_parser.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_types.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/cudf/cudf_types_pp.cmi /usr/share/doc/ocaml-cudf /usr/share/doc/ocaml-cudf/README
and I'm not sure that these are really noarch material.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
--- Comment #3 from Jon Ludlam jon@recoil.org --- Updated SRPM URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf-0.7-2.fc21.src.rpm Updated SPEC URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf.spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
Richard W.M. Jones rjones@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rjones@redhat.com
--- Comment #4 from Richard W.M. Jones rjones@redhat.com --- You can probably ignore the "error" ocaml-cudf.x86_64: E: no-binary rpmlint has some problems with OCaml packages, although it has improved over time.
The spec file looks reasonable to me.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
Richard W.M. Jones rjones@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1183826
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183826 [Bug 1183826] Review Request: ocaml-dose3 - a framework for managing distribution packages and their dependencies
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
Richard W.M. Jones rjones@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1185099
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185099 [Bug 1185099] Review Request: opam - A source-based package manager for OCaml
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ludlam jon@recoil.org --- Updated to add in a license file (COPYING) and to fix a missing {?_isa} macro in the devel package Requires line.
Spec URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf.spec SRPM URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf-0.7-3.fc21.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
--- Comment #6 from Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitoring@fedoraproject.org --- jonludlam's scratch build of ocaml-cudf-0.8-1.fc23.src.rpm for f23 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11536796
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
--- Comment #7 from Jon Ludlam jon@recoil.org --- New upstream release.
Spec URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf.spec SRPM URL: http://www.recoil.org/~jon/ocaml-cudf-0.8-1.fc23.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1183191
Ben Rosser rosser.bjr@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED CC| |rosser.bjr@gmail.com Blocks| |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed| |2017-08-11 18:03:34
--- Comment #8 from Ben Rosser rosser.bjr@gmail.com --- Jon has been absent since 2015 and nonresponsive on other tickets; therefore I'm marking this as a dead review and resubmitting it here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1480794
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1480794 ***
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com -
Red Hat Bugzilla