[Bug 496635] Review Request: monodevelop-debugger-mdb - Mono Debugger Addin for MonoDevelop

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496635





--- Comment #36 from Mauricio Henriquez <buhochileno at gmail.com>  2009-06-05 14:57:23 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #35)
> The source tarball has to be exactly the same as the upstream release. You can
> check that with md5sum:
> [paul at papaya SOURCES]$ md5sum monodevelop-debugger-mdb-2.0.tar.bz2 
> 55f225ffb47a67289d342bf389e133c8  monodevelop-debugger-mdb-2.0.tar.bz2
> [paul at papaya SOURCES]$ md5sum
> ../../Downloads/monodevelop-debugger-mdb-2.0.tar.bz2 
> b60e9a0783f294aaa137c78e32c4f6be 
> ../../Downloads/monodevelop-debugger-mdb-2.0.tar.bz2
> 
> Please use the upstream tarball.
using the upstream packages I get:
.0.0.0 mono(mscorlib) = 2.0.0.0
Processing files: monodevelop-debugger-mdb-devel-2.0-3.fc10
rpmbuild: rpmfc.c:407: rpmfcHelper: Assertion `EVR != ((void *)0)' failed.
Aborted

That is a bug in rpmbuild tools that crash with certain missing info in the
sources, now I don't remeber what exactly wha tit was, but if I remember
correctly was the missing Version info at:
mono.debugging.backend.mdb.pc.in

> 
> I know it's nutpicking - but lets make it right: What I meant with change the
> changelog is this diff:
> 67c67
> < * Thu Jun 04 2009 Mauricio Henriquez <buhochileno at gmail.com> - 2.0-1
> ---
> > * Thu Jun 04 2009 Mauricio Henriquez <buhochileno at gmail.com> - 2.0-3
> 70c70
> < * Sun May 03 2009 Ryan Bair <ryan at thebairs.info> - 2.0-1
> ---
> > * Sun May 03 2009 Ryan Bair <ryan at thebairs.info> - 2.0-2
> 73c73
> < * Thu Apr 30 2009 Mauricio Henriquez <buhochileno at gmail.com> - 2.0
> ---
> > * Thu Apr 30 2009 Mauricio Henriquez <buhochileno at gmail.com> - 2.0-1
> 
> 
> The last entry should always be equal to the version and release number. Hope
> that makes sense to you.
nop, sorry not at all :-S

Something like this for the last one then?:
* Thu Jun 05 2009 Mauricio Henriquez <buhochileno at gmail.com> - 2.0-3
- Source tarball changed to the upstream one
..also why we are using "3" as the release number?
> 
> OK, only the tarball left for the review. :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.