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 194612
Summary: | Review Request: pstoedit | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Denis Leroy <denis> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Patrice Dumas <pertusus> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | ||
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: | 2006-06-15 17:55:37 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, 175257 |
Description
Denis Leroy
2006-06-14 12:33:30 UTC
It would be nice for xfig too. Not a a blocker but did you consider packaging plotutils, since it is especially advertized in the readme that it gives much more output formats. I am seriously considering packaging ming, and then you'll be able to enable swf support but it may be approved before that. From my reading of configure.ac, it seems that you miss Buildrequires: gd-devel gd-devel requires libpng-devel and zlib-devel, but I think that it makes sense to keep the BR on libpng-devel. There is a BR (and a Requires) on ghostscript missing (for gs). pstoedit overwrite CXXFLAGS. This should be reported upstream and in the meantime, the best solution seems to me to be a patch for configure that removes the line 22593 (line 398 in configure.ac for upstream) Spec URL: http://www.poolshark.org/src/pstoedit.spec SRPM URL: http://www.poolshark.org/src/pstoedit-3.44-2.src.rpm Thanks for catching the missing Req and BRs. I filed the configure.ac bug upstream. Yes, I was aware of the optional dependency on plotutils, but my main goal was to close bug 175257 since the ability to import postscript files into inkscape (and xfig) was requested by multiple people. I would recommend that we go on with the review of pstoedit without plotutils support for now, and build a new release later when plotutils is available (I'll work on it). If you submit a package for ming, I'll review it. There are .so files in /usr/lib/pstoedit/. Are these dlopened 'internal' libraries? Right. I had initially put them in the devel package, but that doesn't work. They're not automatically linked into the pstoedit executable, but rather loaded internally by pstoedit init code (see src/dynload.cpp). Indeed they seem to qualify as internal dlopened libraries. It is somehow strange that upstream don't simply link them, it would be cleaner, but it isn't really problematic. That was the last issue I found, so now for the formal review: * rpmlint is silent * follow naming guidelines * licence is GPL and included * source match upstream 13f24cb070da3f6af82ed84f4e53f049 * build on FC5 * buildrequires seem right, although I haven't built in mock * ldconfig is run * creates the directory it owns, except /usr/share/aclocal/. Not a big deal, in my opinion, as there are other packages that do that. I am not sure but it seems that there were some discussions about that, but I can't recall the result. I don't consider that a blocker but you may want to raise the issue on the extras list * things in -devel are right. There are .so in the main package, but these are dlopened libraries APPROVED (In reply to comment #3) > release later when plotutils is available (I'll work on it). If you submit a > package for ming, I'll review it. I'm not in a hurry to package ming since it evolves rapidly and is a bit beta. As long as nobody ask explicitly for it I'll refrain... Patrice, many thanks for your review.
> buildrequires seem right, although I haven't built in mock
I did. Builds cleanly for FC-4, FC-5 and devel.
|