[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 Erik van Pienbroek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Erik van Pienbroek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-11 19:52:25 EDT --- Package has landed in Rawhide, closing ticket -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-09 21:06:15 EDT --- cvs done. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 --- Comment #6 from Conrad Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-08 07:15:52 EDT --- Many thanks for the careful and thorough review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hellanzb Short Description: Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor Owners: konradm Branches: EL-5 F-8 F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 --- Comment #5 from Erik van Pienbroek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-08 06:55:13 EDT --- * * * This package is APPROVED * * * -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 --- Comment #4 from Conrad Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-06 19:52:35 EDT --- Fixed. Sorry for merging the two patches, that happened on accident and I've reversed it now. Spec URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/hellanzb.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/hellanzb-0.13-5.fc9.src.rpm Continues to build in mock. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 --- Comment #3 from Erik van Pienbroek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-06 09:49:41 EDT --- Some new comments: * BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel is actually unncessary, python-setuptools should be sufficient enough * Why did you merge the unrar and the configuration patch? They both have different goals so they should be kept seperate -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 --- Comment #2 from Conrad Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-06 04:08:06 EDT --- Thanks for your suggestion of dumping README.Fedora if no configuration is found; I believe I've added this and fixed the other issues in these new spec/srpms: Spec URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/hellanzb.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/hellanzb-0.13-4.fc9.src.rpm Additionally it now builds in mock [0]. [0]: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=761872 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086
--- Comment #1 from Erik van Pienbroek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-08-05 12:18:47
EDT ---
General comments:
* On a fresh installation, the program won't start:
$ hellanzb
Could not find configuration file in the following dirs: ['/home/erik',
'/usr/etc', '/home/erik/etc', '/home/erik']
* The program searches for config files in /usr/etc instead of /etc
* Can you patch the program so the contents of the README.Fedora file
are shown on startup on environments where no config file is available yet ?
This way, new users can get this program up-and-running faster
$ rpmlint hellanzb.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint hellanzb-0.13-3.fc9.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint hellanzb-0.13-3.fc10.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ md5sum hellanzb-0.13.tar.gz
d3510c6b1b2c7b935332a469fdc8e7e2 hellanzb-0.13.tar.gz
$ wget http://www.hellanzb.com/distfiles/hellanzb-0.13.tar.gz --quiet -O - |
md5sum
d3510c6b1b2c7b935332a469fdc8e7e2 -
Compilation in mock fails, probably due to a missing BuildRequires:
Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.73995
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ cd hellanzb-0.13
+ LANG=C
+ export LANG
+ unset DISPLAY
+ /usr/bin/python -c 'import setuptools; execfile("setup.py")' build
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
ImportError
:
No module named setuptools
RPM build errors:
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.73995 (%build)
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.73995 (%build)
Review - python eggs:
[ OK! ] Must: Python eggs must be built from source. They cannot simply drop an
egg from upstream into the proper directory.
[ OK! ] Must: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[ OK! ] Must: If egg-info files are generated by the modules build scripts they
must be included in the package.
[ N/A ] Must: When building a compat package, it must install using
easy_install -m so it won't conflict with the main package.
[ N/A ] Must: When building multiple versions (for a compat package) one of the
packages must contain a default version that is usable via "import MODULE" with
no prior setup.
[ N/A ] Should: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface
should provide egg info.
Review:
[ OK! ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
[ OK! ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines .
[ OK! ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming
Guidelines .
[ OK! ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
[ OK! ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines .
[ OK! ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[ OK! ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[ OK! ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[ OK! ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ OK! ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL.
[ OK! ] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one supported architecture.
[ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[FALSE] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.
[ N/A ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[ N/A ] 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.
[ N/A ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
[ OK! ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[ OK! ] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
[ OK! ] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[ OK! ] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
[ OK! ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the
macros section
[Bug 456086] Review request: hellanzb - Hands-free nzb downloader and post processor
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=456086 Erik van Pienbroek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
