Re: [opensuse-packaging] Help to review a package

...

...

On 4/22/2009 at 17:58, Vincent Untz wrote: Hi,

I'd like the help from other packagers to review this package: home:FunkyM:branches:GNOME:Factory/libinfinity

It's needed for the new gobby that will end in GNOME:Factory once libinfinity will be ready.

I'm requesting help since it does stuff that I'm not used to, like installing a daemon, using a sysconfig file, etc.

Vincent, I assume you refer to the submitreq to Contrib (The one from Sascha)? A short reading of just the buildlog reveals for example: Error: Missing "Requires: gtk2-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinfgtk-1.0.pc requires gtk+-2.0.pc). Error: Missing "Requires: glib2-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinfinity-1.0.pc requires glib-2.0.pc). Error: Missing "Requires: glib2-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinfinity-1.0.pc requires gobject-2.0.pc). Error: Missing "Requires: libxml2-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinfinity-1.0.pc requires libxml-2.0.pc). Error: Missing "Requires: libgnutls-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinfinity-1.0.pc requires gnutls.pc). Error: Missing "Requires: libgsasl-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinfinity-1.0.pc requires libgsasl.pc). Error: Missing "Requires: gtk2-devel" in libinfinity-devel (/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libinftextgtk-1.0.pc requires gtk+-2.0.pc). Additionally, I would point out some 'weirdness' in the spec file: the Package infonoted has a hard dependency on %{name} = %{version} %{name} itself is an Obsoleted / Provided symbol by the package %_name (so the lib name according to shlib policy). I would prefer not to use the obsoleted name in a dependency we introduce ourself in a spec file. Additionally, this is normally handled by Automatic dependency for libraries, but it might make change to bind to a specific version (if upstream does not really take care of the API inside the SO-Versions). Otherwise, this Requires> could be dropped completely. %debug_package by convention should not be part of the spec file (it's enabled / disabled in the meta of the packages and would cause conflicts if the project has it enabled) For the SHLib package: It installs files /usr/lib64/libinfgtk-1.0.so.0 /usr/lib64/libinfgtk-1.0.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libinfinity-1.0.so.0 /usr/lib64/libinfinity-1.0.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libinftext-1.0.so.0 /usr/lib64/libinftext-1.0.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/libinftextgtk-1.0.so.0 /usr/lib64/libinftextgtk-1.0.so.0.0.0 which makes me wonder if we should not be prepared for any 'future' libinfgtk-2.0.so.0 appearing (some projects prefer to 'version' their package in the filename instead of the SONAME. This could possibly lead to conflicts in the future. I would suggest a package name of: libinfinity-1_0-0 (there are cases like this in the distribution, for example libatk) And as I'm by far no expert and just write to have said something: All this represents just my opinion in accordance to my understanding of the best-practice with regards to the openSUSE packaging. Dominique PS: Ups.. just re-read your post before submitting and you mentioned home:FunkyM:branches:GNOME:Factory/libinfinity... well bullocks. but then: osc rdiff --oldprj=home:saigkill home:FunkyM:branches:GNOME:Factory libinfinity shows no difference between the two.. so I think the entire text should stay valid :) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org