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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp

------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2007-10-15 13:38 EST ------- Please check your packages by rpmlint before submitting to review request.

For 0.5.2-1:

* Dependency between subpackags - Please check the dependency between subpackages of this srpm - xmlroff should have "libfo = %{version}-%{release}" - libfo-devel should have "libfo = %{version}-%{release}".

* Requires - Would you explain why libfo-devel should require libxslt-devel?

* ldconfig - Please call ldconfig for libraries under %_libdir on scriptlets.

* Documents - The dependency order is that xmlroff requires libfo. So if only libfo is installed, no documents (COPYING, AUTHORS and so on) are installed, which is not proper.

* Directory ownership - Please check the owner of %_datadir/xml . On my system, -------------------------------------------------------- $ rpm -qf /usr/share/xml xml-common-0.6.3-21.fc8 libglade2-2.6.2-3.fc8 -------------------------------------------------------- However xmlroff requires neither of these packages.

* pkgconfig .pc file - should be installed in -devel package. - And the package containing .pc file must have "Requires: pkgconfig".

* Timestamp - To keep timestamps, please use ------------------------------------------------------- make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" ------------------------------------------------------- This method usually works for recent Makefiles.

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

ivazqueznet@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |NEW Flag|needinfo?(ivazqueznet@gmail.| |com) |

------- Additional Comments From ivazqueznet@gmail.com 2007-10-26 03:46 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1)

• Requires
  • Would you explain why libfo-devel should require libxslt-devel?

From libfo-0.5.pc:

Requires: glib-2.0 gobject-2.0 gmodule-2.0 libxslt gdk-pixbuf-2.0

http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/xmlroff/xmlroff.spec http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/xmlroff/xmlroff-0.5.2-2.src.rpm

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

------- Additional Comments From ivazqueznet@gmail.com 2007-10-26 04:40 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4)

So would you check if libxslt-devel is _actually_ needed? From header files it seems this "libxslt" should be "libxml-2.0" (i.e. Requires: not libxslt-devel but libxml2-devel).

From libfo/fo-xslt-transformer.c:

#include <libxslt/xslt.h> #include <libxslt/xsltInternals.h> #include <libxslt/transform.h>

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

------- Additional Comments From ivazqueznet@gmail.com 2007-10-28 04:12 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6)

(In reply to comment #5)

...

(In reply to comment #4)

...

So would you check if libxslt-devel is _actually_ needed? From header files it seems this "libxslt" should be "libxml-2.0" (i.e. Requires: not libxslt-devel but libxml2-devel).

From libfo/fo-xslt-transformer.c:

...

#include <libxslt/xslt.h> #include <libxslt/xsltInternals.h> #include <libxslt/transform.h>

It is for BuildRequires, not for Requires for -devel package.

No, another package BuildRequires libfo-devel, which then in turn Requires libxslt-devel so that the package can build.

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

------- Additional Comments From ivazqueznet@gmail.com 2007-11-03 03:08 EST ------- I see what you did there...

http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/xmlroff/xmlroff.spec http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/xmlroff/xmlroff-0.5.2-3.src.rpm

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

------- Additional Comments From ivazqueznet@gmail.com 2007-11-09 02:42 EST ------- I'll do you one better.

http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/xmlroff/xmlroff.spec http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/packages/xmlroff/xmlroff-0.5.2-4.src.rpm

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

ivazqueznet@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?

------- Additional Comments From ivazqueznet@gmail.com 2007-11-14 08:44 EST ------- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: xmlroff Short Description: A XSL-FO processor Owners: ivazquez Branches: F-7 F-8 Cvsextras Commits: yes

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: xmlroff - A XSL-FO processor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=261581

------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2007-11-16 01:47 EST ------- Please close this bug when rebuild and request on bodhi are done.