Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: libgda5 - Library for writing gnome database programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
Summary: Review Request: libgda5 - Library for writing gnome database programs Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: karlthered@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/libgda5.spec SRPM URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/libgda5-5.0.3-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: libgda5 is a library that eases the task of writing Gtk3-based database programs.
scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3771151
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
Tomáš Bžatek tbzatek@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tbzatek@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Tomáš Bžatek tbzatek@redhat.com 2012-03-20 13:13:29 EDT --- $ rpmlint libgda5-5.0.3-1.fc18.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint x86_64/*.rpm
libgda5-bdb.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-bdb-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ndb -> db, nib, nab libgda5-bdb-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-java.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-java-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-ldap.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-ldap-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-mdb.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-mdb-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-mysql.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-mysql-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-postgres.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-postgres-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-sqlcipher.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-sqlcipher-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-sqlite.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-sqlite-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-list-server-op libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-list-config-5.0 libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-sql libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-test-connection-5.0 libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-sql-5.0 libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-list-config libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-list-jdbc-providers-5.0 libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-control-center-5.0 libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-list-server-op-5.0 libgda5-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gda-browser-5.0 libgda5-ui.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-ui-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-ui-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gdaui-demo-5.0 libgda5-web.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgda5-web-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 24 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 32 warnings.
The no-documentation warning could be easily ignored, manpages would be nice to have but it's not a blocker.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
Tomáš Bžatek tbzatek@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |tbzatek@redhat.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
--- Comment #2 from Tomáš Bžatek tbzatek@redhat.com 2012-03-20 14:11:01 EDT ---
BuildRequires: unique-devel >= 1.1.6
Shouldn't this be unique3 rather? Also, configure.ac references no libunique, is that really necessary?
BuildRequires: gnome-keyring-devel BuildRequires: libgnome-keyring-devel
Duplicate BR, only use libgnome-keyring-devel
BuildRequires: libtool automake autoconf
Not needed probably, I don't see any traces of automake files modifications
Explicit require of libgcrypt-devel would be nice, it's referenced from configure as well.
BuildRequires: gtk-doc scrollkeeper intltool gettext flex bison perl(XML::Parser)
Are flex and bison really necessary?
Note: some header files in the -devel package reference header files which should ideally belong to plugins. Let's keep them all in the common -devel package.
Note: builds fine in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3914490
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
--- Comment #3 from Haïkel Guémar karlthered@gmail.com 2012-03-24 16:43:13 EDT --- Thanks, I cleaned the BR accordingly to your previous comments. For bison and flex, they are required for the sql parser (libgda/sql-parser)
updated spec and src.rpm: Spec URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/libgda5.spec SRPM URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/libgda5-5.0.3-2.fc16.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kalevlember@gmail.com
--- Comment #4 from Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com 2012-04-04 07:04:38 EDT --- Most other libraries use one -devel package and only split up various binary packages. In here I see libgda5-devel, libgda5-ui-devel, libgda5-sqlite-devel, libgda5-bdb-devel, libgda5-ldap-devel, libgda5-sqlcipher-devel, libgda5-web-devel, libgda5-postgres-devel, libgda5-mdb-devel, and libgda5-java-devel. This is making the spec file a lot more complex than it needs to be.
Wouldn't it be easier to just merge all these together into one -devel? Also see how Debian: http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/libgda5 and openSUSE: https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=libgda.spec&package=li... do the split. They both have just one -devel package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
--- Comment #5 from Haïkel Guémar karlthered@gmail.com 2012-04-08 09:52:21 EDT --- I checked the pkg-config modules, and it seems that providers only require the base one, so it makes sense regrouping them with the main one.
I won't merge the *-ui-devel into the main *-devel subpackage since it would also pull the whole UI stuff. Debian => they don't build the UI parts, so this issue is irrelevant to them. openSUSE => they didn't and i disagree with them here. openSUSE also ship separately: * GObject introspection stuff (against Fedora common practices) * libgda-{reports,xslt} libraries which pull libxml2 and libxslt, the former is commonly installed, the latter is a small add-on library of the former. I chose that it was not worth the hassle to ship them separately. I might reconsider this, if someone thinks they should.
updated spec and src.rpm: Spec URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/libgda5.spec SRPM URL: http://hguemar.fedorapeople.org/review/libgda5-5.0.3-3.fc17.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pbrobinson@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from Kalev Lember kalevlember@gmail.com --- Is it really necessary to have parallel installable libgda / libgda5 packages? Can't we just update the existing libgda package to 5.x and rebuild deps against the new version?
A quick repoquery indicates that the following packages requires libgda:
anjuta glom gnome-python2-gda gtranslator libgdamm
With the exception of gnome-python2-gda (a subpackage of gnome-python2-extras), I believe these should all build fine with libgda 5.x. And gnome-python2-gda can just be killed off; nothing uses this any more.
I can help with some provenpackager action to get this done for F18, if needed.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788569
Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed| |2012-11-25 10:22:57
--- Comment #7 from Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com --- libgda was updated to 5.x instead as there weren't many deps and no remaining requirement for compatibility
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org