[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 Julian Sikorski changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: libSOIL - |Review Request: SOIL - |Simple OpenGL Image Library |Simple OpenGL Image Library --- Comment #3 from Julian Sikorski 2011-12-23 07:05:27 EST --- New release: Spec URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/SOIL.spec SRPM URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/SOIL-1.07-3.20080706.fc16.src.rpm Changes: - Ported a Debian patch ensuring the correct linking -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 --- Comment #5 from Mohamed El Morabity 2012-01-03 07:19:28 EST --- Notice also these rpmlint warnings: SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/include/SOIL/SOIL.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/include/SOIL/SOIL.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/include/SOIL/image_DXT.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/include/SOIL/image_DXT.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/include/SOIL/stbi_DDS_aug.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/include/SOIL/stbi_DDS_aug.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/include/SOIL/image_helper.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/include/SOIL/image_helper.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/include/SOIL/stbi_DDS_aug_c.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/include/SOIL/stbi_DDS_aug_c.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/include/SOIL/stb_image_aug.h SOIL-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/include/SOIL/stb_image_aug.h -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057
Mohamed El Morabity changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #4 from Mohamed El Morabity 2012-01-03
07:18:01 EST ---
The package looks quite good. Just one comment anyway: I think you could get
rid of the sed patching, since all the Makefile parameters you modify can be
overridden, as below:
%build
pushd src
make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -c -fPIC" -f
../projects/makefile/alternate\ Makefile.txt
popd
%install
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
pushd src
make install -f ../projects/makefile/alternate\ Makefile.txt install
DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL_FILE="install -p" INSTALL_DIR="install -dp"
LIBDIR="%{_libdir}" INCLUDEDIR=%{_includedir}/SOIL
popd
The less you patch, the better it is ^^.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 --- Comment #6 from Julian Sikorski 2012-01-03 13:43:51 EST --- I am not sure how you got these warnings: [julas@snowball2 SPECS]$ rpm -q SOIL-devel SOIL-devel-1.07-3.20080706.fc16.x86_64 [julas@snowball2 SPECS]$ rpmlint SOIL-devel SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [julas@snowball2 SPECS]$ ls -l /usr/include/SOIL razem 64 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 3212 2008-07-07 image_DXT.h -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 2287 2008-07-07 image_helper.h -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 15545 2008-07-07 SOIL.h -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 15447 2008-07-07 stbi_DDS_aug_c.h -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 797 2008-07-07 stbi_DDS_aug.h -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 16945 2008-07-07 stb_image_aug.h I think it is a side-effect of your sed replacement, -m 644 got missing somehow. Are you 100 % positive that overriding the makefile variables is better than sed? A proper patch would be the best, but it is impossible for macros encoding arch-dependent paths. To me it seems to be the matter of personal preference - I find the sed overrides more legible since they change one thing at a time. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 --- Comment #7 from Mohamed El Morabity 2012-01-10 18:45:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > I am not sure how you got these warnings: > [julas@snowball2 SPECS]$ rpm -q SOIL-devel > SOIL-devel-1.07-3.20080706.fc16.x86_64 > [julas@snowball2 SPECS]$ rpmlint SOIL-devel > SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > [julas@snowball2 SPECS]$ ls -l /usr/include/SOIL > razem 64 > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 3212 2008-07-07 image_DXT.h > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 2287 2008-07-07 image_helper.h > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 15545 2008-07-07 SOIL.h > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 15447 2008-07-07 stbi_DDS_aug_c.h > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 797 2008-07-07 stbi_DDS_aug.h > -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 16945 2008-07-07 stb_image_aug.h > I think it is a side-effect of your sed replacement, -m 644 got missing > somehow. Indeed, sorry for this mistake. > Are you 100 % positive that overriding the makefile variables is better than > sed? A proper patch would be the best, but it is impossible for macros > encoding > arch-dependent paths. To me it seems to be the matter of personal preference - You're absolutely and totally right. The problem I see with sed is that you could modify more (or less) than what you want. For example: sed -i "s|-O2 -Wall|$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -fPIC|" alternate\ Makefile.txt If this Makefile is updated, for example compilation flags are added, this sed command will skip the new options added; if flags are removed, this sed command will be ignored. Unless your sed command is robust enough to take into account such situations, I think overriding Makefile variables is maybe a better way to customize the build/installation. > I find the sed overrides more legible since they change one thing at a time. By adding line breaks in the long make command, it's still readable ^^. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 --- Comment #8 from Julian Sikorski 2012-01-11 11:25:57 EST --- New release: Spec URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/SOIL.spec SRPM URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/SOIL-1.07-4.20080706.fc16.src.rpm Changes: - Use variables instead of sed to fix the makefile -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057
--- Comment #9 from Mohamed El Morabity 2012-01-12
07:41:59 EST ---
Here is the review:
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing
MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
SOIL.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stb -> st, stab, stub
SOIL.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stb -> st, stab, stub
SOIL-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
>>The warnings can be safely ignored
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[=] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
>>src/image_helper.c is licensed under the MIT license. You should probably fix
>>the License tag as described below:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Mixed_Source_Licensing_Scenario
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
>>MD5 sum=4736ac4f34fd9a41fa0197eac23bbc24 OK
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[+] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Once the licensing issue fixed, I will approve your package.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 --- Comment #10 from Julian Sikorski 2012-01-12 07:53:32 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) > [=] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual > license. > >>src/image_helper.c is licensed under the MIT license. You should probably > >>fix the License tag as described below: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Mixed_Source_Licensing_Scenario Good catch, licensecheck -r missed it. New release: Spec URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/SOIL.spec SRPM URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/SOIL-1.07-5.20080706.fc16.src.rpm Changes: - Fixed the License tag -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 Mohamed El Morabity changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Mohamed El Morabity 2012-01-12 07:59:51 EST --- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 Julian Sikorski changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Julian Sikorski 2012-01-12 08:02:23 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: SOIL Short Description: Simple OpenGL Image Library Owners: belegdol Branches: F-16 F-15 InitialCC: -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla 2012-01-12 08:09:44 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759057] Review Request: SOIL - Simple OpenGL Image Library
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=759057 Julian Sikorski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-01-12 08:40:23 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
