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 176733
Summary: | Review Request: php-pear-DB (PEAR database abstraction layer) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Tim Jackson <rpm> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | David Lawrence <dkl> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-extras-list, fedora, jorton |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | wtogami:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-02-12 10:34:01 UTC | Type: | --- |
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: | 178821 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Tim Jackson
2005-12-31 11:19:27 UTC
I'm adding Joe Orton to cc as Joe, your input here would be really appreciated. (Especially about moving this to Core, in which case I presume you would take over the package) - Use "%define peardir %(pear config-get php_dir 2> /dev/null || echo %{_datadir}/pear)" and BR php-pear instead of hardcoding %peardir - Drop Source1 - Wipe %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install, not of %prep - Do NOT use / in %files; be more explicit (In reply to comment #0) > 3. As a new FE contributor, I've been a bit confused about the whole license-file-in-package debate. Upstream (by convention AFAICT) does not seem to explicitly include license files in any PEAR packages. In this package I have manually brought in the license file. I'd rather not do this if I can avoid it; do I have to? You do not have to bring in the license from an external source. Thanks for the submission Tim. Other than Ignacio's comments this looks fine; I'd also trim down the %description a bit to something more succinct. We should probably have php-pear own /var/lib/pear too (note to self... :). I think that Extras is the appropriate place for PEAR modules to be packaged. OK, thanks for the comments, all good! I've taken them all on board and done a few cleanups of my own, and here goes with a new version: Spec URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/php-pear-DB.spec SRPM URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/php-pear-DB-1.7.6-2.src.rpm Any further comments or anyone willing to approve this package and sponsor me? That looks fine to me. (I'm not set up to be sponsor, otherwise I would) - Builds fine in FC4 mock - Upstream source matches - rpmlint output: W: php-pear-DB invalid-license The PHP License - ignorable, rpmlint problem E: php-pear-DB non-executable-script /usr/share/pear/tests/DB/tests/run.cvs 0644 E: php-pear-DB non-executable-script /usr/share/pear/tests/DB/tests/driver/run.cvs 0644 - ignorable; they aren't meant to actually be run per se AFAIK W: php-pear-DB dangerous-command-in-%post install - bogus, but add pear to Requires(post) and Requires(postun) - The rest looks good The Requires(post{,un}) change can easily enough be made in CVS. APPROVED Build fails due to php-pear missing dep on php (bug #178821) Thinking about this more: this file %{_var}/lib/pear/DB.xml is just static, right? Or does it change? If it doesn't change it should be in %{_libdir}/php/pear/ instead, or something. We can have php-pear own the containing directory once it is decided, either way. The DB.xml file is static for a particular version of a package, so yes you're right that maybe %_var is not the right place. libdir/php/pear sounds good to me; any comments to the contrary? The only possible problem is that I *think* this was formerly used in some installations as the actual installation directory for PEAR modules; that shouldn't actually be a problem but may make a slight mess. In the absence of any feedback I've changed the path for the package XML file to libdir/php/pear in CVS and there is a build job running now. Built in devel. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: php-pear-DB Updated Fedora Owners: rpm.uk,Fedora I will push actual 1.7.6 to EL-5 and 1.7.11 to devel (after F8 branch) Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: php-pear-DB New Branches: EL-5 |