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=492164 --- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; 2009-03-25 14:29:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) And Java, and IDL, etc. HEALPix contains a half dozen of bindings. I'm packaging C bindings, because I need C bindings, placing them in a separate subpackage, so that anyone who needs the other bindings can easily and consistently add them. Do you need the Fortran bindings? I'll gladly accept a patch for the package and provide help creating it if it is needed. -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola(a)iki.fi&gt; 2009-03-26 04:50:07 EDT --- Okay, got the Fortran stuff to build after a few hours of work. Feel free to rearrange the header files, libraries and subpackage names as you see fit, as this was just the first draft :) -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; 2009-04-03 09:09:47 EDT --- Thanks, Jussi. I've incorporated your changes, and adjusted it into using a shared library instead of static one. Here you are: SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/healpix.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/healpix-2.11c-3.el5.src.rpm -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola(a)iki.fi&gt; 2009-04-03 12:00:31 EDT --- rpmlint output: chealpix.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libchealpix.so chealpix.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libchealpix.so exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 chealpix-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation healpix-fortran.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libgif.so healpix-fortran.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libhealpix.so healpix-fortran-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. - Did you send the shared library patch upstream? IIRC some package sponsors have frowned on Fedora specific patches to build shared libraries. - Even though there is only one C header, it might be logical to put it into the same place as the Fortran module files. - Maybe Fortran package should be named just 'healpix'. MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. OK MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK - The java library seems to be under LGPLv2+, but since it isn't included no problem. MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. NEEDSFIX - chealpix and healpix-fortran need to call ldconfig in %post phase. MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. OK MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. OK MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. NEEDSFIX - fortran-devel must require fortran since the libraries are in fortran. MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. OK MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola(a)iki.fi&gt; 2009-04-04 04:25:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) Probably yes, these are just warnings anyway. Yeah; I spent some time some months ago trying to figure out how to package this, but very quickly found out that I had no idea of how to do it. Your example with the C part helped me get the Fortran stuff working. Well, if upstream uses includedir, then I don't see any reason to change it. It's just one file anyway. Still, I'm not sure about how logical it is; to compile a Fortran binding you still need to supply -I/usr/include/healpix. You should make a comment about this to healpix-devel. Yes, in retrospect I think "healpix" is best for the name of the Fortran package and healpix-devel for the Fortran development modules, since IIUC Healpix started out as a purely Fortran package and got the C, IDL and Java stuff later. I don't use healpix myself (I'm in materials physics), but I have a few friends who use it. I can comaintain the package with you. Yes, it was :) OK. Also, it occurred to me that there is a check phase that should be enabled: make c-test and make f90-test -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #11 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; 2009-04-04 09:24:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Exactly, package's configure scripts is kind of sickest shit I've seen for ages. After running it I had to run around and show all my friends :) (In reply to comment #10) I've always been amazed how people writing scientific software can get everything they can wrong, even the regression testing :) I see you've packaged them, I'm fine with that, just moved them to -devel, since they're of more-or-less no use unless you're a developer, and needlessly occupy space when dragged in as dependency. Um, yes, you're insane :) I'm honestly hoping that Java bindings aren't going to follow until the package is imported :) Seriously, you're going to have commit access so why delay the review with new features. I'm pretty happy with your changes. I've removed some useless compiler flags, which are not typically used for Fedora, as they're not generic enough, or cause other sort of trouble (such as -fomit-frame-pointer making debugging more difficult, etc.) I've also done some cosmetic changes, such as getting rid of backticks (`) just for the sake of consistency with the rest of the SPEC file, and a personal taste. Sounds reasonable enough. I probably would not have renamed libgif, but I don't object either. You've done pretty good job documenting the changes, so why not. I'm starting to wonder who's the packager and who's reviewer here :) If I had been the reviewer, I'd most likely approved the packages now, since I'm reasonably with your changes now. Anyways, I've done some changes, see the changelog. I would not artifically add soname here, unless absolutely required. I don't think this is going to cause much trouble, I believe we're not going to have many packages that depend on this and API seems to be reasonably sane. This is in printerror(), which is specifically meant to exit the program. No problem here, I'd waive this. Documentation in main packages depended on by these. Again, no problem here. I've fixed the mode, but am not sure what is this script good for. Why pack this in a separate file and not run it in %check? No need to comment. SRPMS: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/healpix.spec SRPMS: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/healpix-2.11c-5.el5.src.rpm -- 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.

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=492164 Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; 2009-04-04 10:04:56 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: healpix Short Description: Hierarchical Equal Area isoLatitude Pixelization of a sphere Owners: lkundrak, jussilehtola Branches: EL-5 F-10 F-11 InitialCC: (just watchbugzilla please) astronomy-sig -- 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.

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=492164 Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #15 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; 2009-04-07 03:17:02 EDT --- Thanks for the review and enhancements, Jussi. Imported and built. -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #17 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola(a)iki.fi&gt; 2009-04-07 04:03:19 EDT --- There's something wrong with the import (and your SRPM!). The SRPM spec & sources are still revision 3 instead of 5! -- 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.

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=492164 --- Comment #19 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak(a)v3.sk&gt; 2009-04-07 04:47:00 EDT --- That was probably since [1] pointed at the old package. I copied it from -3 and intended to rsync -5 there, but probably the rsync was not successful. [1] http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/healpix-2.11c-5.el5.src.rpm Anyways, the correct version in builds now. Thank you. -- 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.