[Bug 191017] Review Request: eclipse-subclipse

[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-subclipse


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191017





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-08-08 20:26 EST -------
OK folks, this builds but installation is a bit odd:

GC Warning: Couldn't read /proc/stat
GC Warning: GC_get_nprocs() returned -1
GC Warning: Couldn't read /proc/stat
GC Warning: GC_get_nprocs() returned -1
dirname: missing operand
Try `dirname --help' for more information.
mkdir: missing operand
Try `mkdir --help' for more information.
GC Warning: Couldn't read /proc/stat
GC Warning: GC_get_nprocs() returned -1
/usr/bin/rebuild-gcj-db: line 17:  4325 Segmentation fault     
/usr/bin/gcj-dbtool -n $dbLocation 64
GC Warning: Couldn't read /proc/stat
GC Warning: GC_get_nprocs() returned -1
xargs: /usr/bin/gcj-dbtool: terminated by signal 11
GC Warning: Couldn't read /proc/stat
GC Warning: GC_get_nprocs() returned -1

Any idea what this is about?  It's an install in a mock chroot, so perhaps
there's some weirdness due to that, but I doubt it's reasonable for things to
segfault.

rpmlint has some complaints:

On the srpm:

W: eclipse-subclipse mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs
   Some lines are indented with tabs, some with spaces, and some of the
Requires: and BuildRequires: lines have both.

W: eclipse-subclipse patch-not-applied Patch10:
eclipse-subclipse-1.1.4-plugin-classpath.patch
  Not sure what's up here; perhaps a comment as to why this isn't applied would
help.

On the binary rpm:
W: eclipse-subclipse non-standard-group Text Editors/Integrated Development
Environments (IDE)
  I don't think there's any concensus as to what to do with groups at this
point; following Eclipse is probably best.

W: eclipse-subclipse invalid-license EPL
  Seems OK as that's what Eclipse uses.

W: eclipse-subclipse no-documentation
  Indeed, there's nothing marked as %doc.  Is there anything that should be so
marked?  There are license files as plain text and HTML changelog files and
such, which seems like they qualify.

W: eclipse-subclipse dangling-symlink
/usr/share/eclipse/plugins/org.tigris.subversion.subclipse.core_1.1.4/lib/javasvn.jar
/usr/share/java/javasvn.jar
  This is OK; it's a symlink to a dependency.

W: eclipse-subclipse symlink-should-be-relative
/usr/share/eclipse/plugins/org.tigris.subversion.subclipse.core_1.1.4/lib/javasvn.jar
/usr/share/java/javasvn.jar
  However, the link should be relative.

The symlink warnings are repeated for these files:
/usr/share/eclipse/plugins/org.tigris.subversion.subclipse.core_1.1.4/lib/ganymed.jar
/usr/share/eclipse/plugins/org.tigris.subversion.subclipse.core_1.1.4/lib/svnjavahl.jar



-- 
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.