[Bug 457160] Review Request: Zorba - General purpose XQuery processor implemented in C++

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=457160


David Timms <dtimms at iinet.net.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?(tibbs at math.uh.edu |
                   |)                           |




--- Comment #30 from David Timms <dtimms at iinet.net.au>  2009-05-24 09:20:17 EDT ---
Created an attachment (id=345244)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=345244)
rpmbuild failure on F11- (rawhide)

(In reply to comment #29)
> New upload
> SRPM: ftp://zorba-xquery.com/zorba-0.9.5-6.fc10.src.rpm
> SPEC: ftp://zorba-xquery.com/zorba.spec  
> I see that cmake-2.6.4-1 is now in updates for Fedora 10.  This version fixes
> the bug discussed in the previous comments.   So I fixed the zorba.spec file
> to require this version and things build fine for me on Fedora 10.
No go on F11- see attached end of compile.

> I had gcc 4.4 installed in /usr/local on my development machine and the
> sources required a few patches to compile with that version.   So I've
> included them with this update. These patches do not break the build with
> older versions of gcc.

I've triggered a test build on koji: (f10-updates)
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1374263

ps. package versions. The upstream seems to have gone:
ls -1
zorba.spec-0.9.21-2
zorba.spec-0.9.21-3
zorba.spec-0.9.4-2
zorba.spec-0.9.5-2
zorba.spec-0.9.5-6

$ rpmdev-vercmp 0 0.9.21 2 0 0.9.4 2
0:0.9.21-2 is newer

You would have to be careful with those, I think to ensure that 0.9.4 was
packaged as 0.9.21-4.4 or something (to avoid epochs). Alternately it might
have been better knowing what we know now to package 
0.9.21-1 as 0.9.2-3.21 and
0.9.21-2 as 0.9.2-4.21 and
0.9.21-3 as 0.9.2-5.21. 
or
0.9.21-1 as 0.9.2.1-3.21 and so forth.
Otherwise rpm upgrade paths wont work. More on
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease

-- 
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.