[Bug 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #27 from Adam Williamson 2009-05-06 12:15:21 EDT --- I'd tend towards 'no'. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 James Laska changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jla...@redhat.com --- Comment #26 from James Laska 2009-05-06 10:00:10 EDT --- Should this bug remain open? -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #25 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-28 22:28:42 EDT --- here's the review request for gst-mixer: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498136 I'd rather focus on that for now, after that we can decide if it's a good idea to put gnome-alsamixer in too or not. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #24 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-28 16:48:50 EDT --- just an update here: I am currently not working on this, as I'm trying to build a package of the old gnome-volume-control code instead to make Bastien happy. He would rather have the old gnome-volume-control (which is still maintained for use in non-Pulse situations like Solaris) rather than the effectively unmaintained gnome-alsamixer. I'm trying to get a fully working old gnome-volume-control, parallel installable with the new one, built by the end of today - it has to be patched to identify itself as something other than gnome-volume-control, but Ubuntu has some patches to do that which I should be able to steal. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593
--- Comment #23 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-25
08:41:24 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> at least in a mockbuild for F10 the construct
>cat > /%{name}.desktop << EOF
> fails because / is not writable by mock.
>cat > %{name}.desktop << EOF
> however works just fine.
good catch. My fault in the patch when I changed to desktop-file-install which
I "corrected" when I switched to the external .desktop file so I never noticed
that part during the review...
Should be fixed for the import.
--
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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #22 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-25 08:38:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) > This *is* the latest submission and it fails Works for me: [andr...@workstation ~]$ wget -q http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm [andr...@workstation ~]$ rpmbuild --rebuild gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm Installing gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root warning: user adamw does not exist - using root warning: group adamw does not exist - using root Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.EDaoPb -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #21 from manuel wolfshant 2009-04-25 08:33:34 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=341315) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=341315) successfull build log of alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm (with one small change in the spec) only change versus http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm is removing the leading "/" in the name of the desktop file when creating it inline. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #20 from Christoph Wickert 2009-04-25 08:27:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) > Old file. That was already fixed. > http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm > was the last submission from packager and does not exhibit that problem. > Not a blocker. This *is* the latest submission and it fails: $ rpmbuild --rebuild Desktop/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm Installiere Desktop/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Benutzer adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Warnung: Gruppe adamw existiert nicht - benutze Root Fehler: Zeile 24: Ungültiges Zeichen '-' in release: Release: 0.1.20090424gitc540b26.gnome-alsamixer-20090424gitc540b26.tar.bz210 -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593
--- Comment #19 from manuel wolfshant 2009-04-25
08:18:33 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> > rpmbuild --rebuild does not work for F-10, see
> > http://fpaste.org/paste/10125
>
> Old file. That was already fixed.
> http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm
at least in a mockbuild for F10 the construct
cat > /%{name}.desktop << EOF
fails because / is not writable by mock.
cat > %{name}.desktop << EOF
however works just fine.
--
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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #17 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-25 08:04:31 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=341313) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=341313) changing inline .desktop to external -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #18 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-25 08:07:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) > The guidelines were not updated yet, but inline creating of desktop files is > allowed for few weeks now, see https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/129 for > details. Thanks for clearing that up. Considering that, I'd retract my latest patch. Package is fine as is. If Adam wants to externalize the .desktop file, it's up to him. I don't consider any of the raised points blockers for inclusion. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593
--- Comment #16 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-25
08:02:04 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Please don't use %makeinstall, see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used
As discussed on IRC: make DESTDIR doesn't work, I checked.
Patching the makefile would be an option, but using %makeinstall does work as
expected. If the maintainer wants to patch the Makefile to make DESTDIR work,
that is fine. I'd leave it to his discretion.
It's not a blocker as is.
> Inline desktop file creation ws forbidden recently, see
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.desktop_file_creation
The wiki does state "You can do this by including a .desktop file you create as
a Source: (e.g. Source3: %{name}.desktop) or generating it in the spec file."
As you mentioned on IRC, there seems to have been a mail somewhere stating
this. So even though it seems not (yet) to be official policy, I've attached a
patch fixing this potential future problem.
> rpmbuild --rebuild does not work for F-10, see http://fpaste.org/paste/10125
Old file. That was already fixed.
http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.fc10.src.rpm
was the last submission from packager and does not exhibit that problem.
Not a blocker.
--
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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 Dan Horák changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d...@danny.cz --- Comment #15 from Dan Horák 2009-04-25 07:52:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > Inline desktop file creation ws forbidden recently, see > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.desktop_file_creation The guidelines were not updated yet, but inline creating of desktop files is allowed for few weeks now, see https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/129 for details. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 Christoph Wickert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@christoph-wickert.de --- Comment #14 from Christoph Wickert 2009-04-25 06:50:15 EDT --- Please don't use %makeinstall, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used Inline desktop file creation ws forbidden recently, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.desktop_file_creation rpmbuild --rebuild does not work for F-10, see http://fpaste.org/paste/10125 -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #13 from manuel wolfshant 2009-04-25 05:33:16 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=341305) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=341305) thanks for providing a decent alternative to PA Thanks for bringing this tool in, guys. Despite what PA team thinks, I prefer the topmost control panel over the one in the bottom. With alsa I can individually control the left and right output channel. And a couple more inputs which are doomed in PA as being irrelevant. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 Andreas Thienemann changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-25 04:16:03 EDT --- Looks good. Approved. Please be so kind and add all commands needed for tarball generation as a comment. Not only git clone, but the appropriate tar command. But we don't need a new review-round for that. Please follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CVS_admin_requests to have the existing gnome-alsamixer ACLs changed and a new branch created for F11 and devel. A "Package Change Request" would be appropriate for that. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 Andreas Thienemann changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andr...@bawue.net -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #11 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-25 04:05:19 EDT --- Just uploaded an updated .spec and .src.rpm with the patch applied. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #10 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-25 03:59:01 EDT --- Quoting Dave Airlie from the list: "I took a quick look at this, and gnome-media has the code moved to the gst-mixer subdir, but thats it, the code still believes its called g-v-c, all the files are called that, the gconf schema keys, the desktop, etc. So I suspect the effort to do that vs ship gnome-alsamixer at this point in the development cycle isn't going to provide any useful advantages to the advanced sound configuration people are requiring. Like it the answer to the question is otherwise run a cli app called alsamixer, I'd ship a kde app quicker :)" To this I'd add that we don't necessarily *want* a fairly heavy gstreamer mixer applet that supports Pulse as well as ALSA mixer control. We want a simple standalone application that simply lets you poke the ALSA mixers, nothing else. gnome-alsamixer seems to fit that description. But again I will go for the old g-v-c if more people favour it. I'd just ask that someone else do the work of completing the re-write to identify as something different from the new g-v-c, and handling the package, as I'm not familiar with it at all. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #9 from Rahul Sundaram 2009-04-25 02:33:10 EDT --- IMO, your understanding seems incorrect. Refer http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2009-January/msg00330.html -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #8 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-25 02:15:19 EDT --- Rahul: my reasoning is that the one from gnome-media in f10 is the one that's truly 'dead', because it's been turning into the new Pulse-style mixer that this is intended to supplement. I think it'd be more of a hack to take the old g-v-c from f10 era and call it something else than it is to just take a different project. what we're demonstrating here is that there's likely to be space for a 'full' mixer for GNOME for the foreseeable future, so to me it seems to make more sense to pick gnome-alsamixer, which - if the demand turns out to be there - could easily be resurrected as a fully maintained project upstream; the space is there for it and it's still a part of GNOME git. You couldn't do that with the old gnome-volume-control, because that's already become the *new* gnome-volume-control... I wouldn't really mind if people felt strongly that we should take the old g-v-c instead, though. my goal is only to have a decent GUI alsa-level mixer available out of the box in f11, I'm not that strongly wedded to one or the other. -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 Rahul Sundaram changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sunda...@redhat.com --- Comment #7 from Rahul Sundaram 2009-04-25 00:56:13 EDT --- Is there a reason you are picking this project which is dead upstream instead of using the one included in Fedora 10 which is part of gnome-media? -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593
--- Comment #6 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-24 20:10:44
EDT ---
Mandatory items
===
[ PASS ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm
gnome-alsamixer.i586: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/gconf/schemas/gnome-alsamixer.schemas
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Warning is to be ignored
[ OKAY ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
[ OKAY ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[ OKAY ] 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.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ TODO ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL.
671ac31745fe4a8d4c40c18f6a5fd1aa gnome-alsamixer-20090424gitc540b26.tar.bz2
This has been verified to correspond to git sha1 c540b26. Please include
specifics on generating the tarball. See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control
[ OKAY ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one primary architecture.
Build successfully on i586, ppc, ppc64 and x86_64
[ NOOP ] 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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[ OKAY ] 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.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[ NOOP ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[ NOOP ] 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. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[ OKAY ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does
not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which
does create that directory.
[ OKAY ] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[ OKAY ] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be
set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include
a %defattr(...) line.
[ OKAY ] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[ OKAY ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[ OKAY ] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[ NOOP ] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[ NOOP ] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[ NOOP ] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[ NOOP ] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[ NOOP ] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability).
[ NOOP ] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[ NOOP ] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the
base package using a fully versioned dependency.
[ OKAY ] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must
be removed in the spec if they are built.
[ TODO ] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
desktop-file-install is not used.
[ OKAY ] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by
other packages.
[ OKAY ] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{
[Bug 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #5 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-24 19:41:58 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=341259) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=341259) Patch fixing minor issues in the .spec (e.g. desktop-file-install etc.) and a bit of whitespacing -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #3 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-24 18:44:37 EDT --- revised a bit more per comments from ixs, and srpm location changed slightly: http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424.aw_fc11.src.rpm -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #4 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-24 18:47:03 EDT --- grr, now it's: http://adamwill.fedorapeople.org/gnome-alsamixer/gnome-alsamixer-0.9.7-0.1.20090424gitc540b26.aw_fc11.src.rpm -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 --- Comment #2 from Adam Williamson 2009-04-24 18:08:12 EDT --- spec revised to fix a few errors and mandriva-isms and pass rpmlint and mock build, same URLs. -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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 497593] Review Request: gnome-alsamixer - advanced mixer for GNOME
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=497593 Andreas Thienemann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||andr...@bawue.net Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Andreas Thienemann 2009-04-24 17:41:44 EDT --- reviewing... -- 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
