[Bug 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772485 Mario Blättermann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2012-07-11 16:00:32 --- Comment #11 from Mario Blättermann --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 828891 *** -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772485 --- Comment #10 from Mario Blättermann --- New package is available: Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/wmnd.spec SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/wmnd-0.4.15-1.fc17.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4123503 $ cd /home/mariobl/Arbeitsfläche/wmnd [mariobl@t61 wmnd]$ rpmlint -i -v * wmnd.i686: I: checking wmnd.i686: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US A dictionary for the Enchant spell checking library is not available for the language given in the info message. Spell checking will proceed with rpmlint's built-in implementation for localized tags in this language. For better spell checking results in this language, install the appropriate dictionary that Enchant will use for this language, often for example hunspell-* or aspell-*. wmnd.i686: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found de A dictionary for the Enchant spell checking library is not available for the language given in the info message. Spell checking will proceed with rpmlint's built-in implementation for localized tags in this language. For better spell checking results in this language, install the appropriate dictionary that Enchant will use for this language, often for example hunspell-* or aspell-*. wmnd.i686: I: checking-url http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/ (timeout 10 seconds) wmnd.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wmnd-0.4.15/COPYING The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. wmnd.src: I: checking wmnd.src: I: checking-url http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/ (timeout 10 seconds) wmnd.src: I: checking-url http://dockapps.windowmaker.org/download.php/id/827/wmnd-0.4.15.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) wmnd.x86_64: I: checking wmnd.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/ (timeout 10 seconds) wmnd.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wmnd-0.4.15/COPYING The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. wmnd-debuginfo.i686: I: checking wmnd-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/ (timeout 10 seconds) wmnd-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/wmnd-0.4.15/src/list.h The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. wmnd-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking wmnd-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/ (timeout 10 seconds) wmnd-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/wmnd-0.4.15/src/list.h The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings. -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772485 --- Comment #9 from Mario Blättermann --- (In reply to comment #8) > "spectool -c wmnd.spec && tar -xf wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz" works fine here... >... > Could you try it with spectool again please? > [mariobl@t61 SPECS]$ spectool wmnd.spec && tar -xf wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz Source0: http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/releases/wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz tar: wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz: Cannot open: No such file or directory tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now Doesn't work for me. Sorry. In other cases, e.g. when the upstream sources are no longer available, I was using the pool at dockapps.windowmaker.org. In our case, the dockapp pool doesn't provide the 0.4.16, but the 0.4.15. There were no significant or bug-critical changes between these releases: commit ab81744cb20cb2ad82f5004217e47a57eb380d00 Author: Yuri D'Elia Date: Mon Aug 16 17:57:46 2010 +0200 Fix build failure on FreeBSD 8.1 commit 6521413c6b88e9e8ac810ec1c313b6fddeb45734 Author: Yuri D'Elia Date: Mon Jun 7 18:51:47 2010 +0200 Spelling fixes. I think I should use the 0.4.15 release (from dockapps.windowmaker.org) and eventually patch it to fix the spelling errors. > Another issue would be: it should be "eine Dockapp" - like "eine > Applikation". > ^ Weil es hier um die deutsche Beschreibung geht, weiter in Deutsch. Das Windowmaker-Dockapp ist schon lange ein Neutrum. Steht zwar so nicht im Duden, aber es ist so üblich. Zum Beispiel im Linuxuser: http://www.linux-community.de/Internal/Artikel/Print-Artikel/LinuxUser/2000/10/Jo-s-alternativer-Desktop/%28article_body_offset%29/2 Die Windowmaker-Dockapps sind weitaus älter als die Apps aus den App Stores, Markets usw. deshalb wäre es aus meiner Sicht unnötig, das zu ändern. -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #8 from Thomas Spura 2012-03-25 06:07:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > Unpacking the usual way doesn't work for me, sorry. Neither gzip nor tar nor > File Roller are able the unpack it correctly. The way I use in the spec works. "spectool -c wmnd.spec && tar -xf wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz" works fine here... > $ md5sum * > d8229eece41c9fd0fde12198ce85191a wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz > d8229eece41c9fd0fde12198ce85191a wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz.packaged $ rpmdev-md5 wmnd-0.4.16-1.fc16.src.rpm 317b6794d053283d0eb6dba27cf04356 wmnd-0.4.16-1.fc16.src.rpm e7d2b2084872253ace998ec47ddf908a wmnd.spec d8229eece41c9fd0fde12198ce85191a wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz $ md5sum wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz 7369b40f330506cd687a5d3a630208c4 wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz Seems like you have a different tarball packaged as downloaded with spectool... Could you try it with spectool again please? Another issue would be: it should be "eine Dockapp" - like "eine Applikation". ^ -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485 --- Comment #7 from Christos Triantafyllidis 2012-02-12 16:24:38 EST --- Hi Mario, just to be clear, i did an informal review as i'm not sponsored to do a formal one. To my knowledge the way you unpack the tarball proves that you embed a gzipped tar.gz. I'm not sure if vendor provides such tarball (if this is the case i would advice you to contact them). Regarding md5sum and filesizes this was report from rpmlint not mine :) I hope that someone will help you soon to include this package in the dist by formally reviewing it. Christos -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485 --- Comment #6 from Mario Blättermann 2012-02-12 16:06:59 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > > It looks like your SRPM embedded .tar.gz is gzipped: > > $ gunzip wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz > $ file wmnd-0.4.16.tar > wmnd-0.4.16.tar: gzip compressed data, from Unix, last modified: Mon Aug 16 > 20:10:11 2010, max compression > $ tar -ztf wmnd-0.4.16.tar > wmnd-0.4.16/ > (other filenames) > wmnd-0.4.16/src/README.master.xpm > Unpacking the usual way doesn't work for me, sorry. Neither gzip nor tar nor File Roller are able the unpack it correctly. The way I use in the spec works. > > This should also fix the file size mismatch. > When I compare the hashes of the srpm tarball and the downloaded tarball, i get the following: $ md5sum * d8229eece41c9fd0fde12198ce85191a wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz d8229eece41c9fd0fde12198ce85191a wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz.packaged -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485 --- Comment #5 from Christos Triantafyllidis 2012-01-09 15:02:20 EST --- Hi Mario, There should be some issue with the tar.gz you are using. Try re-downloading it from vendor: Your tar.gz: $ file wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz: gzip compressed data, from Unix, last modified: Mon Aug 16 20:10:53 2010 $ tar -ztf wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz tar: This does not look like a tar archive tar: Skipping to next header tar: Exiting with failure status due to previous errors The one at vendor's website: $ file wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz: gzip compressed data, from Unix, last modified: Mon Aug 16 20:10:11 2010, max compression $ tar -ztf wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz wmnd-0.4.16/ (other filenames) wmnd-0.4.16/src/README.master.xpm It looks like your SRPM embedded .tar.gz is gzipped: $ gunzip wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz $ file wmnd-0.4.16.tar wmnd-0.4.16.tar: gzip compressed data, from Unix, last modified: Mon Aug 16 20:10:11 2010, max compression $ tar -ztf wmnd-0.4.16.tar wmnd-0.4.16/ (other filenames) wmnd-0.4.16/src/README.master.xpm This should also fix the file size mismatch. Regards, Christos -- 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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485
--- Comment #4 from Mario Blättermann 2012-01-09
14:25:46 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> BTW, shouldn't this have WindowMaker or something in "Requires:"?
>
> (sorry i'm not WindowMaker user)
No, not needed. Windowmaker dockapps are *designed* for Windowmaker and any
other window manager which supports these applets (Fluxbox, Openbox, Pekwm,
Afterstep...) but you can run them in any environment in windowed mode, too.
(In reply to comment #3)
> Some more comments on SPEC file:
>
> Replace:
> zcat %{_sourcedir}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz | tar -xvzf -
> with:
> %setup -q
>
Doesn't work in this case. The package seems to be gzipped in an odd manner,
and the setup macro seems to be unable to detect it correctly.
I will have a look at the other issues next days.
--
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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485
--- Comment #3 from Christos Triantafyllidis
2012-01-08 17:51:13 EST ---
Some more comments on SPEC file:
Replace:
zcat %{_sourcedir}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz | tar -xvzf -
with:
%setup -q
Your make should include Fedora's optflags:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Compiler_flags
--
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 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485
Christos Triantafyllidis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||christos.triantafyllidis@gm
||ail.com
--- Comment #1 from Christos Triantafyllidis
2012-01-08 17:25:30 EST ---
Hi Mario,
an informal review for your package:
[CHECK] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the
build produces. The output should be posted in the review.
- There are several warning/errors on rpmlint results:
wmnd.spec:28: E: use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR
wmnd.spec:44: W: macro-in-comment %doc
wmnd.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Dockapp -> Dock app, Dock-app,
Dockage
wmnd.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found de
wmnd.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app,
dock-app, dockage
wmnd.src:28: E: use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR
wmnd.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %doc
wmnd.src: W: file-size-mismatch wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz = 188628,
http://www.thregr.org/~wavexx/software/wmnd/releases/wmnd-0.4.16.tar.gz =
188614
wmnd.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Dockapp -> Dock app, Dock-app,
Dockage
wmnd.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app,
dock-app, dockage
wmnd.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/wmnd
wmnd.i686: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/wmnd/NEWS
wmnd.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wmnd/COPYING
wmnd.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Dockapp -> Dock app, Dock-app,
Dockage
wmnd.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app,
dock-app, dockage
wmnd.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/wmnd
wmnd.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/wmnd/NEWS
wmnd.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wmnd/COPYING
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 13 warnings.
[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. [2] .
[CHECK] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
- Check the comments on the other 'MUSTs'
[OK] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[CHECK] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3]
- The README states "... distributed under GNU GPL v2 or above ..." thus
correct version should be "GPLv2+"
[CHECK] 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.[4]
- The %doc macro is hashed out
[OK] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
[OK] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
[CHECK] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
rpmlint complains about filesize so md5sum check should fail
[OK] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture. [7]
[OK] 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. [8]
[OK] 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. Apply common sense.
[OK] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9]
[OK] 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. [10]
[OK] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
[OK] 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. [12]
[OK] 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 directo
[Bug 772485] Review Request: wmnd - Dockapp for monitoring network interfaces
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=772485 --- Comment #2 from Christos Triantafyllidis 2012-01-08 17:29:07 EST --- BTW, shouldn't this have WindowMaker or something in "Requires:"? (sorry i'm not WindowMaker user) Christos -- 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
