[Bug 502388] New: Review Request: mingw32-enchant - MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: mingw32-enchant - MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502388
Summary: Review Request: mingw32-enchant - MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: erik-fedora@vanpienbroek.nl QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com, fedora-mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org Depends on: 502387 Blocks: 499992 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant-1.4.2-6.fc11.src.rpm Description: A library that wraps other spell checking backends.
This is the MinGW build of enchant
Koji scratch build: none yet because mingw32-hunspell isn't in Fedora yet
Approved MinGW packaging guidelines are here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW
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=502388
Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kalev@smartlink.ee
Bug 502388 depends on bug 502387, which changed state.
Bug 502387 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-hunspell - MinGW Windows spell checker and morphological analyzer library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502387
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #1 from Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee 2009-08-08 05:28:27 EDT --- Now that mingw32-hunspell is in Fedora, we can go on with this review. Can you update mingw32-enchant to 1.5.0 before we go on?
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=502388
--- Comment #2 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fedora@vanpienbroek.nl 2009-08-08 11:24:13 EDT --- Here you go:
Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-1.fc12.src.rpm
Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1591579
* Sat Aug 8 2009 Erik van Pienbroek epienbro@fedoraproject.org - 1.5.0-1 - Update to version 1.5.0 - Drop upstreamed patch - Don't use 'make %%{?_smp_mflags}' as this causes a compile failure in Koji
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=502388
Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |kalev@smartlink.ee Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee 2009-08-08 17:51:34 EDT --- Taking for review.
Approved packaging guidelines for MinGW: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW
rpmlint output: $ rpmlint mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-1.fc12.noarch.rpm mingw32-enchant.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/enchant/libenchant_myspell.a 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-enchant-static-1.5.0-1.fc12.noarch.rpm mingw32-enchant-static.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libenchant.a mingw32-enchant-static.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-1.fc12.src.rpm mingw32-enchant.src: W: strange-permission compile-resources 0775 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint mingw32-enchant.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
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=502388
Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee 2009-08-08 18:01:58 EDT --- Fedora review mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-1.fc12.src.rpm 2009-08-09
+ OK ! needs attention
! rpmlint output: mingw32-enchant.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/enchant/libenchant_myspell.a => This is a static lib which needs to be placed in a -static subpackage or removed.
mingw32-enchant-static.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libenchant.a mingw32-enchant-static.noarch: W: no-documentation => Those errors / warnings are harmless and can be ignored for a mingw32 package.
mingw32-enchant.src: W: strange-permission compile-resources 0775 => Should probably be 0755.
+ Package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ Specfile name matches the package base name
! Package does not follow the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines The %files section must list DLLs separately, which also includes the DLLs in %{_mingw32_libdir}/enchant/
+ The stated license (LGPLv2+) is a Fedora approved license
+ The stated license is the same as the one for the corresponding Fedora package
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING.LIB)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm 7dfaed14e142b4a0004b770c9568ed02 enchant-1.5.0.tar.gz 7dfaed14e142b4a0004b770c9568ed02 SRPM/enchant-1.5.0.tar.gz
+ Package builds in mock (Fedora Rawhide i386)
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
! BuildRequires: automake is probably not needed and can be removed Besides that, BuildRequires look sane.
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ Does not use Prefix: /usr
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ %files has %defattr
! %clean contains rm -r $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, but according to packaging guidelines it should be "rm -rf"
+ Consistent use of macros
+ Package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel Fedora MinGW guidelines allow headers in main package
! Static libraries should be in -static %{_mingw32_libdir}/enchant/libenchant_myspell.a needs to be placed either in a -static subpackage or removed.
! Packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files Fedora MinGW guidelines allow .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Filenames must be valid UTF-8
! As per MinGW packaging guidelines, the mingw32- package should track native Fedora package as close as possible and include all the same patches. Consider including three additional patches that the native package has: #http://bugzilla.abisource.com/show_bug.cgi?id=12160 Patch0: enchant-1.5.0-abi12160.searchdirs.patch #http://bugzilla.abisource.com/show_bug.cgi?id=12173 Patch1: enchant-1.5.0-abi12173.leaks.patch #http://bugzilla.abisource.com/show_bug.cgi?id=12174 Patch2: enchant-1.5.0-abi12174.fixbadmatch.patch
! A comment in the spec says that there's a file named "compile-resource" missing from the tarball. Have you filed an upstream bug report for the missing file?
! All patches should have an upstream bug link or comment
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=502388
--- Comment #5 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fedora@vanpienbroek.nl 2009-08-08 19:27:35 EDT --- Thanks for the review!
Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant.spec SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-2.fc12.src.rpm
Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1592303
* Sun Aug 9 2009 Erik van Pienbroek epienbro@fedoraproject.org - 1.5.0-2 - Dropped BR: autoconf libtool - Added BR: m4 - Use 'rm -rf $RPM_BUILDROOT' in the %%clean phase - Fixed a 'strange-permission' rpmlint warning - Moved the file %%{_mingw32_libdir}/enchant/libenchant_myspell.a to the -static subpackage - Use a more verbose %%files list - Added a Requires: pkgconfig to the main package - Added patches from the native enchant package - Dropped another patch which isn't necessary anymore
All the patches which are applied in this package are already upstreamed
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=502388
--- Comment #6 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fedora@vanpienbroek.nl 2009-08-08 19:30:08 EDT --- Forgot to mention this: the missing file is also already known and solved upstream
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=502388
Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Kalev Lember kalev@smartlink.ee 2009-08-09 04:45:31 EDT --- Looks good.
APPROVED
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=502388
Erik van Pienbroek erik-fedora@vanpienbroek.nl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #8 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fedora@vanpienbroek.nl 2009-08-09 04:53:44 EDT --- Thanks for the approval!
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: mingw32-enchant Short Description: MinGW Windows Enchanting Spell Checking Library Owners: epienbro Branches: F-11 InitialCC:
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=502388
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-08-10 01:37:34 EDT --- cvs done.
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=502388
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-11 12:44:31 EDT --- mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-2.fc11
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=502388
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-08-12 16:54:23 EDT --- mingw32-enchant-1.5.0-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
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=502388
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |1.5.0-2.fc11 Resolution| |ERRATA
-
Red Hat Bugzilla