[Bug 437574] Review Request: ruby-pg - A Ruby interface for the PostgreSQL database engine

[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=437574


Jon Ciesla <limb at jcomserv.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |limb at jcomserv.net
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |limb at jcomserv.net
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla <limb at jcomserv.net>  2008-10-10 09:49:01 EDT ---
rpmlint on SRPM is clean.

rpmlint on RPMS:

1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[limb at fawkes SPECS]$ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/i386/ruby-pg-*
ruby-pg.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.7.9.2008.02.05
0.7.9.2008.02.05-1.fc9
The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not
coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package.

ruby-pg.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided ruby-postgres
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

Fix both.

Though indicated to by under the Ruby license, in the spec and on the site, it
includes a few copies of the GPL.  Why is this?  It's not a blocker, just odd.

Per Ruby guidelines:
----
Each Ruby package must indicate the Ruby ABI version it depends on with a line
like

Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8

Ruby packages must require ruby at build time with a BuildRequires: ruby, and
may indicate the minimal ruby version they need for building. 
----


- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun. If the package has multiple subpackages with libraries, each
subpackage should also have a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig.
An example of the correct syntax for this is:

%post -p /sbin/ldconfig

%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig


Fix, or explain why this wouldn't be necessary.


- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.

Are the .h files in ext/ not useful for this purpose?



Otherwise, no other blockers on full 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.