Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 ifoox(a)redhat.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu ------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-06-22 17:56 EST ------- Since Hans has offered to sponsor you once a few of your packages are in shape, I thought I'd take a look at one. I can't take this for review until you've been sponsored but I can make some comments. The package builds fine in mock (x86_64, development) with the reduced buildroot. The debuginfo package comes up a bit empty due to the usual rpm bugs with java; adding the following to the end of the %build section helps, but you'll want to macroize it to match the rest of the spec: # Fix debuginfo generation rm -f org test ln -s src/org ln -s src/test rpmlint has this to say: W: libreadline-java non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java W: libreadline-java no-soname /usr/lib64/libJavaReadline.so.0.8.0 W: libreadline-java devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libJavaReadline.so W: libreadline-java-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Java I'm not sure what's happening with the package groups; Development/Libraries would seem appropriate unless someone has officially added the Java subgroup (which wasn't done for the other languages as far as I know. The unversioned .so file cannot go in the main package; it must go in -devel. I don't know what's causing the no-soname error; it looks like the upstream Makefile doesn't call GCC with -Wl,-soname,blah, but I'm not sure if this is a blocker in this situation. About the spec: The gcj_support thing makes things pretty nasty to read; I wonder if it's really necessary. Don't set Epoch unless you need it to be a nonzero value. No need to use an Epoch on the readline Require. I'm not sure why you need the java_readline and gnu.readline provides. Don't use Distribution or Vendor. You need: Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig instead of Requires: /sbin/ldconfig. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-06-23 18:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) The simple answer is that the guidelines demand it: see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines: - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. The more difficult answer is that I don't completely understand it myself; I believe it has to do with the fact that applications must link against the versioned .so, leaving the unversioned one unneeded for regular operation, along with the question of what the unversioned .so would mean in the face of a future potential compat-libreadlinejava080 package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | nThis| | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-09-08 00:07 EST ------- Hmm, this builds but will not install on current rawhide: Error: Missing Dependency: readline = 5.0 is needed by package libreadline-java Rawhide has readline 5.1; I changed readline_ver to match and it seems to be OK. Also, there are a few rpmlint warnings; I think it now checks for more than it did when I first looked at this package. W: libreadline-java macro-in-%changelog _jnidir W: libreadline-java macro-in-%changelog _libdir You need to double any percent symbols that appear in the changelog, lest they be expanded in the final RPM. E: libreadline-java no-cleaning-of-buildroot You need rpm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install. W: libreadline-java mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs It's complaining about a couple of tabs after Group: (use "less -U" to see them). This isn't a blocker. The debuginfo package is now missing the source again. I'm at a loss as to why this is continually a problem, but it's not really a blocker. Perhaps some day someone will actually understand what's going on here. You need to include COPYING.LIB as %doc. Shouldn't the jar file go in /usr/share/java? If not, nothing in your dependency chain owns /usr/lib/java. * source files match upstream: 501720ddded45eaedf429b7cc356107c libreadline-java-0.8.0-src.tar.gz X package meets naming and packaging guidelines (non-numeric release bits). * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. X dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. X license text upstream but not included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). ? debuginfo package looks complete. X rpmlint has valid complaints X final provides and requires are sane: libreadline-java = 0.8.0-10jpp_3fc = X readline = 5.0 /sbin/ldconfig java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.31 /bin/sh * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * a shared library is present and ldconfig is called properly. * package is not relocatable. ? owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets OK (ldconfig, gcj-db) * code, not content. * javadocs split out into separate jackage. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * unversioned .so in -devel subpackage. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-09-08 17:43 EST ------- OK, the package builds fine in devel with no problems. rpmlint complains much less (just the two that are OK). The other issues I had are fixed as well. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-09-08 20:55 EST ------- Yes, this still builds fine and looks pretty much the same as the previous version outside of a couple of name changes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896 ------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta(a)iki.fi 2006-09-09 05:44 EST ------- By the way, it would be great if the readline->libedit change would also make it possible to enable history support in bsh. OTOH, bsh is in core so a buildrequires: libreadline-java wouldn't work, but perhaps it'd be possible to accomplish it without the build dependency some way? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

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=193896 Ruediger Landmann <r.landmann(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |r.landmann(a)redhat.com Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Ruediger Landmann <r.landmann(a)redhat.com&gt; 2010-08-02 00:53:55 EDT --- Package Change Request ======================= Package Name: libreadline-java New Branches: EL-5 Owners: rlandmann InitialCC: I have discussed this with Alexander Kurtakov, the current package owner, and he is happy for me to maintain this branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.