[packman] Collective bugreport

[Toni]

Am Montag 05 März 2007 schrieb Jan Engelhardt:
> Hi,
>
> just a quick mail to notify the packagers that there are bugs in some
> packages. If you happen to be maintainer for a specific package, please
> fix it at the next best time, thanks.
> Only files in the 10.2 tree were examined.

> (1)
> Packages created by Toni Graffy contain
>
> 	Packager    : Toni Graffy <toni at link2linus.de>
>
> it should perhaps be @links2linux.de.
yes, this typo was in my rpmmacros as I installed my new SuSE-10.2 
build-environment. Was fixed in mid of january, all packages I packaged after 
the fix have the correct email-adress.

> (2)
> Running the following examination command
>
> 	for i in *.src.rpm; do
> 		rpm -qp "$i" --qf="%{PACKAGER}\t%{NAME}\n";
> 	done | sort
>
> turned up a number of oddities (full list at the end of mail):
>
> 	%packager       faac
> 	%packager       lame
> 	%packager       lame
> 	.
> 	.
> 	.
> 	(none)  ac3jack
> 	(none)  bonk
> 	.
> 	.
> 	<many more>

> (3)
> Similarly, querying for %{DISTRIBUTION} does not always return "openSUSE
> 10.2" as Novell/SUSE uses. Or one of %distribution or (none).
> Some also have "9.3", "10.0" or "10.1" in them.
is it openSuSE or openSUSE ?
and must be used for 10.0, 10.1 and 10.2 ? enligthen us.

> (4)
> Same goes for %{VENDOR}.
>
>
> (5)
> CELayoutEditor links against wxWidgets 2.6, but Packman offers WX 2.8,
> so the user is forced to choose one.
the wxWidgets-package can be installed additionally to wxGTK(-devel). And if 
you take such deep looks in our spec-files, you can verify this very 
easily :)
And there is no need to package CELayoutEditor with wxWidgets, as long the 
provided wxGTK is sufficient.

> (6)
> Some packages have a lot of excessive Requires: tags, e.g.
> ingen-0.4pre-0.pm.svn20070224. Picking a Require: from ingen,
>
> 	Requires: libxml2 >= 2.6
>
> This dependency is automatically added through the AutoReqProv mechanism
> (enabled by default) if there is a binary that links against libxml2.
Yes, but as we build also packages for old SuSE-versions, this is necessary 
for our build-system. So as an example Detlef don't try to recompile such 
packages for 64bit on old SuSE-versions, as the lbuild-script stops 
immediately. Otherwise the build would start and would end with a 
compile/link-error. A waste of time. 
And the version numbers appear only as "Requires" as it is needed.

> (7)
> Just a hint: Quite every specfile uses %{macro}. However, RPM also
> accepts %macro, just as bash takes both $var and ${var}.
Thats a kind of style. I prefer the { .. } syntax, because it shows in my 
editor the rpm-tags highlighted.

>
> (8)
> Some specfiles have Packager:/Vendor:/etc. tags. These _do not_
> belong into specfiles, but your .rpmmacros file, or whatever is
> appropriate for the build system you are using. The full list is at the
> end of the mail. Examples:
> 	Lin3gp.spec:Vendor:         Packman
> 	MPlayer.spec:Vendor:            %vendor
> (Plus, Vendor: always defaults to %vendor so that line is redundant,
> but see (4).)
>
>
> (9)
> Some packages (e.g. CELayoutEditor) link against wxWidgets 2.6,
> but packman provides a 2.8 so these are mutually exclusive if a user
> attempts to install either wx or CEL. You might want to look through it.
see my note above. CELayoutEditor is fully functional with wxGTK.
And you don't need to install wxWidgets-2.8

Could you do these checks also for the other SuSE-versions we provide ? We 
would love to get your results!
Thx anyway for your efforts to find those "bugs".

have fun
> Jan Engelhardt
>
<snip>

> _______________________________________________
> Packman mailing list
> Packman at links2linux.de
> http://www.links2linux.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/packman