Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
Summary: Review Request: lv2 - An Audio Plugin Standard Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: green@redhat.com QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/lv2.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/lv2-1.0-0.1.beta1.src.rpm Description: There are a large number of open source and free software synthesis packages in use or development at this time. This API ('LV2') attempts to give programmers the ability to write simple 'plugin' audio processors in C/C++ and link them dynamically ('plug') into a range of these packages ('hosts'). It should be possible for any host and any plugin to communicate completely through this interface.
LV2 is a successor to LADSPA, created to address the limitations of LADSPA which many hosts have outgrown.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2 - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium
bjohnson@symetrix.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bjohnson@symetrix.com
------- Additional Comments From bjohnson@symetrix.com 2007-04-30 18:18 EST ------- A few things:
1) This package creates 0 byte debuginfo packages. 2) There is no arch-dependent files in this package, it should be a noarch. This should fix the problem with #1 too. 3) Why do you create /usr/lib/lv2 directory?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2 - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael@gmx.net 2007-06-27 08:07 EST -------
Is broken. 1870 0x00 bytes.
License: LGPL
The lv2.ttl file uses the MIT licence. Only lv2.h is LGPL.
Is there any package that "BuildRequires: lv2-devel" and accesses the lv2.ttl file at its current location?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2 - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-01-18 23:19 EST ------- It's been over half a year since the last comment; is there still interest in this package?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2 - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From green@redhat.com 2008-01-19 00:17 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3)
It's been over half a year since the last comment; is there still interest in this package?
Yes, I think so. The first official version of lv2 just came out about a week ago. I'll update this submission in the next couple of weeks.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
green@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: lv2 - An |Review Request: lv2core - An |Audio Plugin Standard |Audio Plugin Standard
------- Additional Comments From green@redhat.com 2008-01-21 13:41 EST ------- Upstream's 1.0 release is called lv2core. I've renamed and updated this package appropriately.
http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/lv2core.spec http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/lv2core-1.0-1.fc8.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
green@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-01-21 13:54 EST ------- Did you really want to set fedora-review to '?'? It will drop out of the list of new review tickets, so if you don't already have a reviewer then nobody will see it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
green@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From green@redhat.com 2008-01-21 14:08 EST ------- (In reply to comment #6)
Did you really want to set fedora-review to '?'? It will drop out of the list of new review tickets, so if you don't already have a reviewer then nobody will see it.
Thanks. I've changed it.
AG
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
green@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |429581 nThis| |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
green@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |429585 nThis| |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tibbs@math.uh.edu
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-01-21 17:46 EST ------- Builds OK; here's some rpmlint output:
lv2core.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPL2.1+ Valid tags are at http://fedoraproject.org/Licensing; should be LGPLv2+.
lv2core.x86_64: E: no-binary lv2core.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib lv2core-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package Comment #1 mentioned that this package should be noarch; is there some reason why it needs to be arch-specific? I can't find any reason why it would.
lv2core-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation This is OK.
I'm afraid I don't know what a .ttl file is, but just to be sure: can you confirm that the two ttl files are needed at runtime and not just during compilation? I'm trying to determine whether or not they need to live in the -devel package (which would sort of make the whole thing a -devel package, I guess).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From green@redhat.com 2008-01-21 18:35 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8)
Builds OK; here's some rpmlint output:
lv2core.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPL2.1+ Valid tags are at http://fedoraproject.org/Licensing; should be LGPLv2+.
Ok.
lv2core.x86_64: E: no-binary lv2core.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib lv2core-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package Comment #1 mentioned that this package should be noarch; is there some reason why it needs to be arch-specific? I can't find any reason why it would.
It's conceivable that the .pc file could be different for different architectures.
lv2core-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation This is OK.
I'm afraid I don't know what a .ttl file is, but just to be sure: can you confirm that the two ttl files are needed at runtime and not just during compilation? I'm trying to determine whether or not they need to live in the -devel package (which would sort of make the whole thing a -devel package, I
guess).
They are used at runtime by lv2 hosts.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-01-21 21:01 EST -------
It's conceivable that the .pc file could be different for different architectures.
Then that would be a multilib conflict, and hence another blocker. Anything in the -devel package that installs into the same location on 64bit and 32bit architectures must be identical.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From green@redhat.com 2008-01-21 22:57 EST ------- (In reply to comment #10)
Then that would be a multilib conflict, and hence another blocker. Anything in the -devel package that installs into the same location on 64bit and 32bit architectures must be identical.
The .pc files get installed under %{_libdir}/pkgconfig so there would be no multilib conflict.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From green@redhat.com 2008-01-22 02:28 EST ------- Updated files here:
http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/lv2core.spec http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/lv2core-1.0-2.fc8.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-01-24 00:25 EST ------- If you really think this should be noarch, then you will need to disable the debuginfo package, because it's pointless to ship an empty one: %define debug_package %{nil}
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
------- Additional Comments From pjones@redhat.com 2008-06-25 14:30 EST ------- Why does this need a .pc file at all? Everything that it'll display is (and has always been) the compiler default. If you remove it, building against the header will work just as well, but there'll be no need for it to be arch-specific.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465
tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag| |needinfo?(green@redhat.com)
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-07-02 16:49 EST ------- Well, it's been quite some time since the last comment from the submitter. Setting NEEDINFO; I'll close this soon if there's no further progress.
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=232465
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks| |201449 Resolution| |NOTABUG
--- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-08-09 10:26:50 EDT --- This has been in needinfo for over a month, closing.
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=232465
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|201449 | Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-11-10 17:08:31 EDT ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 470913 ***
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org