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 184582
| Summary: | Review Request: xchm - A GUI front-end to CHMlib | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Patrice Dumas <pertusus> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Michael J Knox <michael> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | lemenkov |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2006-07-21 11:47:16 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: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 163779 | ||
|
Description
Patrice Dumas
2006-03-09 22:28:31 UTC
What about wxGTK? There is wxGTK < 2.6 prevents update. Could you be a bit more precise, please. What update does it prevent? The xchm version I packaged Buildrequires wxGTK-devel >= 2.6, but I didn't add an explicit version in the spec file, because it is intended for devel. It is more clean to do it, though. Updated at: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/xchm-1.4-2.src.rpm I mean that FE current repo does not consist the wxGTK 2.6. It's a problem. Oh, I see. But the current xchm release requires wxGTK 2.6. I would have liked to have xchm in FE3/4. I plan on submitting wxGTK26 for FE4, I'll see if I can complete it. Oops, in the updated srpm, I added support for xmlrpc, but I don't think it is a good idea yet... Please use this srpm instead: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/xchm-1.4-3.src.rpm And indeed it only builds and installs in FC devel. Why do you not build last xchm (now is the 1.8)? Because the review request is from about 2006-03-10. I'll update. New version here: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/xchm-1.8.src.rpm New version here: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/xchm-1.8-1.src.rpm New version available: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/xchm-1.9-1.src.rpm Hi, I will review this package.
----------------------------------------
Review for release 1:
* RPM name is NO
You need to have %{?dist} in the release tag.
* This is the latest version
* Builds fine in mock (rawhide)
* rpmlint looks OK
* File list looks OK
Notes:
Looks good. I am happy to APPROVE this submission, just fix up the release tag.
Please close this report once you have imported the package into CVS.
Just a note, in the future, if you can use the following example for submitting
both srpms and spec, it will make it easier for people to quickly review your
submissions:
Spec URL: http://www.example.com/extras/foo.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.example.com/extras/foo-1.2.3-1.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #11) > * RPM name is NO > > You need to have %{?dist} in the release tag. If I'm not wrong this is not an obligation. However I always use %{?dist}, it is just a mistake of mine. I'll change it right after importing to cvs. > > Looks good. I am happy to APPROVE this submission, just fix up the release tag. Thanks. > Just a note, in the future, if you can use the following example for submitting > both srpms and spec, it will make it easier for people to quickly review your > submissions: > > Spec URL: http://www.example.com/extras/foo.spec > SRPM URL: http://www.example.com/extras/foo-1.2.3-1.src.rpm Ok. I am lazy, but you are the second one making that request, so I'll change my bad habits ;-). Thanks. Built in devel, branche requested in FC-5. Thanks! |