[Bug 638906] Review Request: erlang-gen_leader - A leader election behavior modeled after gen_server

[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=638906

--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com> 2010-10-04 10:23:15 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)

> [  ??  ] owns the directories it creates.
> What owns /usr/lib64/erlang and /usr/lib64/erlang/lib?  Is this package in the
> requires?
...
> Add the license text as a doc and clarify my understanding of the directories
> and then we will be good to go.


* both /usr/lib64/erlang/lib and /usr/lib64/erlang/ are owned by erlang-erts
(listed in runtime Requires)
* I'm afraid I can't add license text to %docs because according to guidelines
I can (and I must) do it only *if* upstream explicitly adds it to the sources.
However I added README file.

I also ensured that beam-file is generated with debug_info (it doesn't hurt
runtime performance but allows users to provide some static analysis in
runtime).

New package and spec-file:

http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-gen_leader.spec
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-gen_leader-0-0.2.fc12.src.rpm

rpmlint output is much better now:

Sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint
../RPMS/ppc/erlang-gen_leader-0-0.2.fc12.ppc.rpm 
erlang-gen_leader.ppc: E: no-binary
erlang-gen_leader.ppc: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
Sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS:

-- 
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.