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 187621
Summary: | Review Request: blam | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal <sindrepb> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | John Mahowald <jpmahowald> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | bnocera, peter |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | petersen:
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: | 2006-05-29 16:51:49 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
Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal
2006-04-01 23:29:56 UTC
I changed configure.in to look for gecko-sharp2 and gtk-sharp2, and also removed the .a, .la, and .so files. The result: http://fedorared.org/~john/review/blam-1.8.2-2.src.rpm Builds after reenabling the find-lang stuff. Doesn't run though. I get this output : "Unhandled Exception: System.DllNotFoundException: libblam.so in (wrapper managed-to-native) Imendio.Blam.MessageConnection:bacon_message_connection_new (string) in <0x0000f> Imendio.Blam.MessageConnection:.ctor (System.String appName) in <0x0005f> Imendio.Blam.Application:.ctor (System.String[] args, System.Object[] props) in <0x0002c> Imendio.Blam.Application:Main (System.String[] args) " Not knowing anything about blam nor C# or anything like this, I've made a patch that for me at least solves this. Basicly changing all references to libblam.so to libblam.so.0 Updated spec: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/blam.spec Updated src.rpm: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/blam-1.8.2-3.src.rpm If this works for you I'll merge the patches and ship upstream. > removed the .a, .la, and .so files.
Eeek! Why also the .so files? These are plugin DSOs in %_libdir/blam/
which are local to this application.
(In reply to comment #3) > Eeek! Why also the .so files? These are plugin DSOs in %_libdir/blam/ > which are local to this application. Oops. Silly me, that isn't a devel file. http://fedorared.org/~john/review/blam-1.8.2-4.src.rpm This version incorporates reenables %find_lang, but it doesn't work, no translations found. Sindre, you're still maintainer when this gets through, srpms are just easy to distribute. > %find_lang, but it doesn't work, no translations found.
Is that on x86_64?
If so, are any of the *gettext configure checks failing for you?
In that case you need to patch the configure script, or get
upstream to use better macros, such as those that come with
glib2-devel's /usr/share/aclocal/glib-gettext.m4. Older macros
use insufficient C casts, which cause the tests to fail.
(In reply to comment #5) > > %find_lang, but it doesn't work, no translations found. > > Is that on x86_64? > > If so, are any of the *gettext configure checks failing for you? > In that case you need to patch the configure script, or get > upstream to use better macros, such as those that come with > glib2-devel's /usr/share/aclocal/glib-gettext.m4. Older macros > use insufficient C casts, which cause the tests to fail. > Yes, actually. Are these symptoms? checking for ngettext in libc... no checking for ngettext in -lintl... no Yes. In config.log is the info about how it failed. Casting to (int) where that doesn't work on 64-bit platforms. Ah ha. With better macros from glib2-devel locales work on x86_64 http://fedorared.org/~john/review/blam-1.8.2-5.src.rpm - rpmlint checks return: W: blam non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/blam.schemas - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - locales handled with %find_lang - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file - works APPROVED I'll work on getting the patch to the author. As mentioned on the wiki (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/OrphanedPackages#nomaint), this package was orphaned a few months ago, most likely as its upstream (Imendio) dropped development. However, Carlos Martín Nieto has volunteered to pick up where its upstream left off (http://www.cmartin.tk/blam.html). Thus, I'd like to claim ownership of this package in Extras and continue from there. Please change the owner to my address (peter). Thanks. The package was indeed orphaned because blam didn't build on FC6 and upstream stated that development on blam would not continue. I was unaware of the project beeing picked up by Carlos Martin Nieto untill now. I am willing to continue maintaing blam under the new circumstances, or let Peter take over if he wishes to do so. Either is fine by me. Sindre: If you'd like, I'd have no trouble handing over primary maintainership to you or comaintaining it. :] After some consideration I've come to the conclusion that I'm really lazy: I'm hereby giving up any claim of maintainership of blam. You take it! (In reply to comment #13) > After some consideration I've come to the conclusion that I'm really lazy: I'm > hereby giving up any claim of maintainership of blam. You take it! Sounds good. :) Would you still like to be on the initial-CC list? Yes, please. (In reply to comment #15) > Yes, please. Okey dokey. :) Would a CVS admin please add foolish to the initial-CC list in owners.list for blam? Thanks! Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: blam New Branches: FC-6 I'd like to continue with Blam! on FC-6 also and would appreciate a branching for it. Thanks. done |