[Bug 222350] Review Request: eclipse-cdt - C/C++ Development plugins for Eclipse

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: eclipse-cdt - C/C++ Development plugins for Eclipse


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222350





------- Additional Comments From jjohnstn at redhat.com  2007-01-18 15:13 EST -------
Packages updated at same URLs.

(In reply to comment #12)
> Almost there.  Just fix the lines beginning with an X:
> 
> MUST:
> * rpmlint on eclipse-cdt srpm gives no output
> * package is named appropriately
> * specfile name matches %{name}
> X package meets packaging guidelines.
> 
> BuildRoot incorrect.  As per this:
> 
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot
> 
> it should be:
> 
> %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
> 

Done.

> Also, you have %{dist} where that should be %{?dist}.
>

Done.
 
> X license field matches the actual license.
> 
> because CPPUnit is still CPL, it has to be:
> 
> License: EPL/CPL
>

Have changed to: Eclipse Public License / CPL

rpmlint doesn't like the combination, but individually, each license above
is valid to rpmlint.
 
> You need to speak to upstream to get them to re-license the cppunit plugin(s)
> 
> * license is open source-compatible.
> X license text included in package and marked with %doc
> 
> you'll need to include a copy of epl-v10.html and cpl.html and mark them with
> %doc in the files section.  Just put them in the cdt core and/or the cdt sdk
> feature directories.
> 

Done.

> * specfile written in American English
> * specfile is legible
> * source files match upstream
>   upstream doesn't provide a source tarball but instructions on how to
>   generate are provided; I can't reproduce the tarballs exactly using these
>   intructions (size differences), but a diff of the exploded contents gives
>   nothing.
> * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 (it's building on
> the other arches in Fedora Core presently)
> 
> > please file a bug in Red Hat bugzilla to investigate building on all arches
> > also, please file a bug with upstream regarding this; we don't care if they
> > _provide_ builds on other platforms than they do now, but it should at least
> > be buildable on all arches.
> 
> * BuildRequires are proper
> * no locale data so no find_lang necessary
> * package is not relocatable
> * package owns all directories and files
> * no %files duplicates
> * file permissions are fine; %defattrs present
> * %clean present
> * macro usage is consistent
> * package contains code
> * no large docs so no -doc subpackage
>   the doc plugins aren't usable outside of Eclipse so there's no point marking
>   them as %doc
> * %doc files don't affect runtime (N/A)
> * shared libraries are present, but no ldconfig required.
> * no pkgconfig or header files
> * no -devel package
> * no .la files
> * no desktop file
> * not a web app.
> * file ownership fine
> X final provides and requires are sane
> 
> $ rpm -qp --provides eclipse-cdt-3.1.1-7.i386.rpm
> cdt_linux.jar.so  
> com.redhat.eclipse.cdt.autotools_0.0.6.jar.so  
> cppunit.jar.so  
> libpty.so  
> libspawner.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.core_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.debug.core_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.core_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.ui_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.debug.ui_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.launch_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.make.core_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.make.ui_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.gnu.ui_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.ui_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.refactoring_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> org.eclipse.cdt.ui_3.1.1.200701181121.jar.so  
> eclipse-cdt = 1:3.1.1-7
> 
> $ rpm -qp --provides eclipse-cdt-sdk-3.1.1-7.i386.rpm
> eclipse-cdt-sdk = 1:3.1.1-7
> 
> $ rpm -qp --requires eclipse-cdt-3.1.1-7.i386.rpm
> /bin/sh  
> /bin/sh  
> eclipse-platform  
> eclipse-platform >= 1:3.2.0
> gdb  
> java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.64
> java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.64
> libc.so.6  
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)  
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)  
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)  
> libdl.so.2  
> libgcc_s.so.1  
> libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)  
> libgcc_s.so.1(GLIBC_2.0)  
> libgcj_bc.so.1  
> libm.so.6  
> libpthread.so.0  
> librt.so.1  
> libz.so.1  
> make  
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> rtld(GNU_HASH) 
> 
> X do we need a Requirement on gcc?
> 

Per offline conversation, I have required gcc-c++, automake, and autoconf.

> $ rpm -qp --requires eclipse-cdt-sdk-3.1.1-7.i386.rpm
> eclipse-cdt = 1:3.1.1-7
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> 
> SHOULD:
> X package includes license text
>   see my comments above about including the EPL and CPL texts as html in the
>   feature directories

Ok.

> * package builds on i386
>   ... and others in brew ATM; I don't envision a problem here)
> * package functions in Eclipse
> X package builds in mock
>   my mock setup doesn't seem to be working but I don't anticipate any problems
>   here as the package currently builds fine in brew
> 

Ok.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.