[Bug 226381] Merge Review: ruby
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Dec 23 15:42:17 UTC 2007
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226381
------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2007-12-23 10:42 EST -------
For 1.8.6.111-3.fc9:
(I maybe missing something else. I will recheck this)
? License
- I always wonder about this.
What does "Ruby" license mean? My understanding is that
when we talk "this is licensed under the same license of
Ruby", this means GPL+ and (Ruby original license), is this
wrong?
From http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html :
-----------------------------------------------------------
License of Ruby
This is a free software license, compatible with the GPL via an explicit
dual-licensing clause.
-----------------------------------------------------------
- For ext/openssl:
ext/openssl uses OpenSSL,
-----------------------------------------------------------
978 gcc -shared -o ../../.ext/i386-linux/openssl.so ossl_x509name.o
ossl_pkey_dsa.o ossl_pkey_rsa.o ossl_x509store
.o ossl_x509revoked.o ossl_engine.o ossl_pkey_dh.o ossl_config.o ossl_pkcs7.o
ossl_bn.o openssl_missing.o ossl_pkcs12.
o ossl_cipher.o ossl_asn1.o ossl_bio.o ossl_ssl.o ossl.o ossl_hmac.o
ossl_x509crl.o ossl_x509ext.o ossl_x509req.o ossl
_ocsp.o ossl_pkey.o ossl_rand.o ossl_x509.o ossl_x509attr.o ossl_x509cert.o
ossl_digest.o ossl_ns_spki.o -L"." -L"../.
." -L. -rdynamic -Wl,-export-dynamic -lruby -lssl -lcrypto -lpthread -ldl
-lcrypt -lm -lc
979 make[1]: Leaving directory
`/builddir/build/BUILD/ruby-1.8.6.111/ruby-1.8.6-p111/ext/openssl'
-----------------------------------------------------------
However OpenSSL license is GPLv2 incompatible (I don't know
for GPLv3). Is this part legally okay?
* SourceURL
- Please don't comment out Source[1-3] full URL (rpmbuild
support full URLs for not only Source0).
(Or you just uncompressed and then recompressed again?
If so, we want to use what is given from upstream directly
as much as possible)
* Requires
- Does not ruby-tcltk require ruby? At least
/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/tkextlib/pkg_checker.rb (on i386) contains
-----------------------------------------------------------
1 #!/usr/bin/env ruby
-----------------------------------------------------------
! For ruby-rdoc, "Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}" is
redundant as ruby-irb already requires it.
(Same for ruby-ri).
* Consistent usage of macros
- If you want to use %__mkdir_p, please also use %__rm, %__make,
etc for consistency.
* Timestamps
We want to keep timestamps as much as possible.
A. Please use "-p" option when using "install" or "cp" commands.
B. Please change:
-----------------------------------------------------------
@@ -181,7 +178,7 @@
--disable-rpath \
--with-ruby-prefix=%{_prefix}/lib
-make RUBY_INSTALL_NAME=ruby %{?_smp_mflags}
+make RUBY_INSTALL_NAME=ruby COPY="cp -p" %{?_smp_mflags}
%ifarch ia64
# Miscompilation? Buggy code?
rm -f parse.o
-----------------------------------------------------------
! rpm -bi --short-circuit
! (Some reviewers perhaps don't mind this, however)
rpm -bi --short-circuit fails when done more than twice:
To pass multiple time short-circuit installation, the following
seem to be needed.
-----------------------------------------------------------
@@ -206,6 +203,7 @@
%endif
# installing documents and exapmles...
+rm -rf tmp-ruby-docs
mkdir tmp-ruby-docs
cd tmp-ruby-docs
@@ -303,19 +297,20 @@
# generate ri doc
rubybuilddir=$RPM_BUILD_DIR/%{name}-%{version}/%{name}-%{arcver}
+rm -rf %{name}-%{arcver}/.ext/rdoc
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}
RUBYLIB=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}:$RPM_BUILD_ROO
T%{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}/%{_normalized_cpu}-%{_target_os} make -C
$rubybuilddir DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
install-doc
#DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/ruby -I $rubyb
uilddir -I
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}/%{_normalized_cpu}-%{_target_os}/ -I
$rubybuilddir/lib
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/rdoc --all --ri-system $rubybuilddir
-----------------------------------------------------------
! Argument list too long.
- When I try normal rpmbuild as my default user, it stops with
"Argument list too long" error.
-----------------------------------------------------------
@@ -278,7 +276,7 @@
done
# make sure that all doc files are the world-readable
-find -type f | xargs chmod 0644
+find -type f -exec chmod 0644 {} ';'
# convert to utf-8
for i in `find -type f`; do
-----------------------------------------------------------
* Some seemingly redundant scripts
- Are the following parts needed?
------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -286,10 +284,6 @@
if [ $? != 0 ]; then
iconv -f iso8859-1 -t utf-8 $i > $.new && mv $i.new $i || exit 1
fi
- if [ -f $i.new ]; then
- echo "Failed to convert with iconv."
- exit 1
- fi
done
@@ -338,7 +333,6 @@
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
-rm -rf tmp-ruby-docs
%post libs -p /sbin/ldconfig
-------------------------------------------------------------
- Also, are there any reasons you prefer tar x"v"f? (for %setup
we usually suppress verbose output).
* Duplicate directories:
- On i386, build.log says:
--------------------------------------------------------------
24078 + cp -pr ruby-1.8.6-p111/LEGAL
/var/tmp/ruby-1.8.6.111-3.fc9-root-mockbuild/usr/share/doc/ruby-libs-1.8.6.111
24079 + cp -pr ruby-1.8.6-p111/LGPL
/var/tmp/ruby-1.8.6.111-3.fc9-root-mockbuild/usr/share/doc/ruby-libs-1.8.6.111
24080 + exit 0
24081 warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby
24082 warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/1.8
24083 warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby
24084 warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8
24085 warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/i386-linux
24086 Provides: bigdecimal.so bubblebabble.so cparse.so curses.so dbm.so
digest.so dl.so enumerator.so etc.so fcntl.so gdbm.so iconv.so libruby =
1.8.6.111-3.fc9 libruby.so.1.8 md5.so nkf.so openssl.so pty.so readline.so
rmd160.so ruby(abi) = 1.8 sdbm.so sha1.so sha2.so socket.so stringio.so
strscan.so syck.so syslog.so thread.so wait.so zlib.so
24087 Requires(interp): /sbin/ldconfig /sbin/ldconfig
--------------------------------------------------------------
IMO the following is better.
--------------------------------------------------------------
@@ -384,12 +378,14 @@
%doc %{name}-%{arcver}/GPL
%doc %{name}-%{arcver}/LEGAL
%doc %{name}-%{arcver}/LGPL
-%dir %{_libdir}/ruby
%dir %{_prefix}/lib/ruby
-%dir %{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}
%dir %{_prefix}/lib/ruby/%{rubyxver}
-%dir %{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}/%{_normalized_cpu}-%{_target_os}
+%ifnarch i386 ppc
+%dir %{_libdir}/ruby
+%dir %{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}
%{sitedir}
+%endif
+%dir %{_libdir}/ruby/%{rubyxver}/%{_normalized_cpu}-%{_target_os}
%{sitedir2}
## the following files should goes into ruby-tcltk package.
%exclude %{_prefix}/lib/ruby/%{rubyxver}/*tk.rb
--------------------------------------------------------------
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list