[Bug 507106] New: Review Request: msp430-libc - C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: msp430-libc - C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=507106
Summary: Review Request: msp430-libc - C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rspanton@zepler.net QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-libc.spec SRPM URL: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-libc-0-1.20090620cvs.fc11... Description: I've just finished packaging msp430-libc, which is a C library for use on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers with the mspgcc toolchain.
Please review :-)
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=507106
--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2009-07-05 20:26:18 EDT --- About the only comments I can make, since I really know nothing of cross-toolchain packages:
Nothing seems to own /usr/msp430/include.
msp430-binutils owns /usr/msp430, and /usr/msp430/lib, but this package doesn't have a dependency on msp430-binutils so those directories will be unowned. If this package really isn't supposed to depend on msp430-binutils then you need to rethink which packages need to own which directories.
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=507106
--- Comment #2 from Robert Spanton rspanton@zepler.net 2009-07-05 22:04:57 EDT --- Hi Jason,
Nothing seems to own /usr/msp430/include.
Yep, I think you're right. It looks like this package should own that. I'll resolve this soon.
... If this package really isn't supposed to depend on msp430-binutils then you need to rethink which packages need to own which directories. ...
This package depends on msp430-gcc, which depends on msp430-binutils.
R
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=507106
--- Comment #3 from Robert Spanton rspanton@zepler.net 2009-07-20 10:10:04 EDT --- Hey,
I've just updated this to own /usr/msp430/include:
Spec URL: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-libc.spec SRPM URL: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-libc-0-2.20090620cvs.fc11...
Rob
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=507106
--- Comment #4 from Robert Spanton rspanton@zepler.net 2009-07-26 12:52:18 EDT --- Patches are now upstream. Reflected in this specfile:
Spec URL: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-libc.spec SRPM URL: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/rds/rpm/mspgcc/msp430-libc-0-3.20090726cvs.fc11...
Rob
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=507106
Steve Whitehouse swhiteho@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |swhiteho@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |swhiteho@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Steve Whitehouse swhiteho@redhat.com 2009-08-14 03:53:53 EDT --- I'll try and review this today - sorry for the delay.
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=507106
--- Comment #6 from Steve Whitehouse swhiteho@redhat.com 2009-08-14 05:17:17 EDT --- rpmlint output:
[steve@quoit ~]$ rpmlint ./msp430-libc.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[steve@quoit ~]$ rpmlint ./msp430-libc-0-3.20090726cvs.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Package name: OK Spec file name: OK Packaging Guidelines: Licensing Guidelines: OK License matches spec file: OK License not in upstream source: OK (but should request that upstream adds it) Spec file in US English: OK Spec file legible: OK Sources match upstream: OK Must build on one arch: OK BuildRequires: OK Locales: N/A Dynamic Lib: N/A Owns all created directories: OK Files only listed once: OK File permissions: OK Consistent Macro use: OK Contains code and permissible content: OK Large doc files: OK (there are none) Nothing in %doc is runtime: OK
Header files must be in a -devel package: Static libraries must be in a -static package: - I assume these two only apply if the package is targetted at the installed platform and that this doesn't apply to cross-libraries & tools. It makes no sense to separate the headers from the library since both are always required to make use of this package. It makes no sense to name the library -static when msp430 only supports static libraries anyway.
pkgconfig: OK (No .pc files included) Library files with .so suffix: OK (None included) Must not contain .la files: OK (None included) GUI Applications: N/A Must not own files/directories owned by other packages: OK Install removes build root: OK Filenames are UTF-8: OK
... and now for the SHOULD items...
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=507106
--- Comment #7 from Steve Whitehouse swhiteho@redhat.com 2009-08-14 05:29:32 EDT --- Package review SHOULD items:
License in upstream source: As above, that should be requested to be added Translations of description & summary: No translations available - can we get those via Transifex I wonder? Not sure how we can arrange that for the spec file itself. Mock build: Robert, have you already tried that? If so I'll take your word for it that it works. Package functions: It is impossible to test all package functions without a huge test suite. I can see that the code looks sane and the only reason for non-functioning would be a broken compiler which is not an issue relating to this particular package. I have used certain functions from this library before and they have worked as expected. Scriptlets: N/A Subpackages: N/A .pc files: N/A File deps outside of certain directories: N/A
So I think we are most of the way there with this.
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=507106
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
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=507106
Till Maas opensource@till.name changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |opensource@till.name
--- Comment #8 from Till Maas opensource@till.name 2009-10-22 11:04:35 EDT --- FYI: it builds on the Fedora buildsystem: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1762830
You can test this yourself with "koji build dist-f13 --scratch msp430-libc-0-3.20090726cvs.fc11.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=507106
--- Comment #9 from Robert Spanton rspanton@zepler.net 2009-11-04 21:26:34 EDT --- Hi,
Sorry about the delay. Yes, as Till says, it does build OK on koji.
So I think this means that this package has passed its review.
Cheers,
Rob
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=507106
Steve Whitehouse swhiteho@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #10 from Steve Whitehouse swhiteho@redhat.com 2009-11-05 03:46:26 EDT --- Yes, I agree.
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=507106
Robert Spanton rspanton@zepler.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #11 from Robert Spanton rspanton@zepler.net 2009-11-05 05:18:46 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: msp430-libc Short Description: C library for use with GCC on Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontrollers Owners: rspanton Branches: F-10 F-11 F-12 InitialCC:
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=507106
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-11-06 15:36:32 EDT --- cvs done.
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=507106
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |ON_QA
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-11-20 00:22:24 EDT --- msp430-libc-0-3.20090726cvs.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update msp430-libc'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2009-11662
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=507106
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-04 19:02:52 EDT --- msp430-libc-0-3.20090726cvs.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
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=507106
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |0-3.20090726cvs.fc12 Resolution| |ERRATA
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla