Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1262515 (qbs)
Summary: | Review Request: qbs - Qt Build Suite | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jake Petroules <jake.petroules> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | ablu.erikschilling, bugs.michael, i, kevin, martin.gieseking, package-review, pahan, rdieter |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2020-08-10 00:52:27 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 177841, 201449, 928937 |
Description
Jake Petroules
2015-09-12 01:43:38 UTC
*** Bug 979124 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jakepetroules/spec-qbs/1.4/qbs.spec SRPM URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11070463 Please upload your SRPM to a place which is accessible with a direct wget call. That allows tools like fedora-review (https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/) to automatically detect the SRPM. Also you cannot download the SRPM from koji after the build is done. And the spec file alone is not enough since patches and sources are not included there. The SRPM is a package which basically contains the .spec file together with all its dependencies (sources and patches mainly). Regards, Erik jakepetroules's scratch build of qbs-1.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11248240 Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jakepetroules/spec-qbs/1.4/qbs.spec SRPM URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jakepetroules/spec-qbs/1.4/qbs-1.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jakepetroules koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11248240 So, how can we start moving this review process forward? This has already been in the works since 2012 or 2013 and I'd really like to get things moving. Generally, you can get sponsored into the packager group when you comment at some package reviews by yourself or become a co-maintainer of an existing package. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group Unfortunately, I can not sponsor you. Though are you interested in mono package reviews - besides Qt stuff? jakepetroules's scratch build of qbs-1.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11578571 Raphael, I already have too much on my plate to get involved with the Mono package reviews. Updated URLs: Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jakepetroules/spec-qbs/1.4/SPECS/qbs.spec SRPM URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/jakepetroules/spec-qbs/1.4/SRPMS/qbs-1.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm jakepetroules's scratch build of qbs-1.4.2-1.fc22.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11578581 (!) 404 not found for the src.rpm > # Required for running the tests > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(Qt5Quick) > BuildRequires: glibc-static > BuildRequires: libstdc++-static Hmmm. Does the comment above that also refer to the two -static packages? Why would tests require linking statically? Since BuildRequires apply to the entire package, the availability of the static libs in the buildroot can be problematic due to linking other executables statically (either accidentally, unknowingly or because of build defaults changing eventually). That would be something to avoid by adding guards or finding ways to eliminate static linking in those tests. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Statically_Linking_Executables [...] Has "fedora-review -b 1262515" been run for this ticket yet? [...] > %package doc > %package examples If these shall stay completely separate subpackages, consider fixing the directory ownership and %license usage for these packages. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_directory_is_owned_by_a_package_which_is_not_required_for_your_package_to_function QBS unfortunately is deprecated now (https://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/10/29/deprecation-of-qbs/) This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience. This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it. |