[Bug 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|ERRATA |CURRENTRELEASE -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc18 -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc16 -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/megaglest-data-3.7.1-1.fc17 -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-08-18 20:28:13 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc16 -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc17 -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: megaglest-data Short Description: Mega Glest data files Owners: pcpa Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: pcpa -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #16 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
--- Comment #12 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com ---
Ok, I can change to make it that way.
I believe megaglest-data should be the owner of %{_datadir}/megaglest (what was
removed in the previous change, and megaglest lists %{_datadir}/megaglest/*).
megaglest-data is supposed to be installed before megaglest, that is or should
be the reason megaglest-data does not require megaglest, but megaglest requires
megaglest-data.
Another change I need to do in megaglest is to include all (but CMakeLists.txt)
the .txt files as .doc.
--
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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #13 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- I removed previous srpms because I am very close to my quota limit. New spec and srpm: Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pcpa/megaglest-data.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pcpa/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc18.src.rpm -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #14 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #12)
I believe megaglest-data should be the owner of %{_datadir}/megaglest (what
was removed in the previous change, and megaglest lists
%{_datadir}/megaglest/*).
megaglest-data is supposed to be installed before megaglest, that is or
should be the reason megaglest-data does not require megaglest, but
megaglest requires megaglest-data.
Ok, to me is fine as long the 2 packages go along.
Also listing as you did:
%files
%doc docs/*
%dir %{_datadir}/megaglest
%{_datadir}/megaglest/configuration.xml
%{_datadir}/megaglest/data/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/glest*
%{_datadir}/megaglest/maps/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/megaglest.bmp
%{_datadir}/megaglest/scenarios/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/techs/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/tilesets/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/tutorials/
Is the same as:
%files
%doc docs/*
%{_datadir}/megaglest
Because the ownership is generated at build time, and the resulting rpm is
identical in both cases. If you prefer, the verbose one is fine.
(In reply to comment #13)
Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pcpa/megaglest-data.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pcpa/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-3.fc18.src.rpm
You can also specify urls this way: http://pcpa.fedorapeople.org/
Package approved!
--
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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
--- Comment #10 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
In addition to the above comments, please change the spec file as this to avoid
confusion and data directory ownership problems with megaglest:
%install
make install DESTDIR=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} -C build
rm -fr ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/megaglest/docs
%files
%doc docs/*
%{_datadir}/megaglest/configuration.xml
%{_datadir}/megaglest/data/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/glest*
%{_datadir}/megaglest/maps/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/megaglest.bmp
%{_datadir}/megaglest/scenarios/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/techs/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/tilesets/
%{_datadir}/megaglest/tutorials/
This way %{_datadir}/megaglest will be owned by megaglest, the docs will be
in the proper place in %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/* and we don't get the
chance of installing megaglest-data without the actual
%{_datadir}/megaglest/ data folder already in place in the filesystem.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
--- Comment #11 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
well, this can even be shorter as long as you don't include the directory
%{_datadir}/megaglest itself:
%install
make install DESTDIR=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} -C build
rm -fr ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/megaglest/docs
%files
%doc docs/*
%{_datadir}/megaglest/*
--
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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #1 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- I will review this package -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #3 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- Issues: [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. [!]: 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 is included in %doc. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text The package does not include the documentation files provided in the source tarball, especially the license file which is included into it. Please add the contents of the docs directory to the resulting rpm as documentation files. [!]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). In my opinion megaglest-data should require megaglest, as alone it is quite ueseless given the fact that there is no other engine able to run the contents of the game. I don't know if it's correct or not so I let you decide. I've seen that megaglest requires megaglest-data, and that is fine. [!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net The sourceforge url downloads an html file, according to the packaging guidelines sourceforge urls' should be explicitly declared as in the packaging guidelines. Apart from these issues the package is good for me. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment #2 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
Sorry for the delay but I had a couple of issues that needed my attention.
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[-]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[-]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[!]: 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 is included in %doc.
[-]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
[!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[!]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
--
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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #4 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #3) Issues: [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. [!]: 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 is included in %doc. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text The package does not include the documentation files provided in the source tarball, especially the license file which is included into it. Please add the contents of the docs directory to the resulting rpm as documentation files. I am reworking the package to mark /usr/share/megaglest/docs/ as %doc, but it is installed: $ rpm -ql megaglest-data | grep megaglest/docs /usr/share/megaglest/docs /usr/share/megaglest/docs/AUTHORS.data.txt /usr/share/megaglest/docs/CHANGELOG.txt /usr/share/megaglest/docs/COPYRIGHT.data.txt /usr/share/megaglest/docs/README.data-license.txt /usr/share/megaglest/docs/README.txt /usr/share/megaglest/docs/cc-by-sa-3.0-unported.txt /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/advanced_architecture.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/advanced_magic.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/aerodrome.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/air_ballista.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/airship.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/ancient_summoning.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/archer.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/archmage.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/archmage_tower.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/barracks.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/battle_machine.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/battlemage.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/behemoth.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/blacksmith.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/blade_weapons.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/castle.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/catapult.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/cow.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/daemon.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/defense_tower.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/dragon.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/dragon_call.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/drake_rider.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/energy_compression.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/energy_sharpening.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/energy_source.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/farm.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/ghost_armor.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/golem.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/guard.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/hell_gate.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/horseman.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/index.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/initiate.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/library.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/mage_tower.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/mana_compression.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/ornithopter.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/piercing_weapons.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/pig.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/rider.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/robotics.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/shield_level_1.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/shield_level_2.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/stables.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/summoner.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/summoner_guild.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/swordman.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/technician.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/technodrome.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/tower_of_souls.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/training_field.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/wicker_behemoth.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/wicker_daemon.html /usr/share/megaglest/docs/glest_factions/worker.html [!]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). In my opinion megaglest-data should require megaglest, as alone it is quite ueseless given the fact that there is no other engine able to run the contents of the game. I don't know if it's correct or not so I let you decide. I've seen that megaglest requires megaglest-data, and that is fine. Not sure how to properly do it from a noarch package, but if cleaning up a system, it should be marked as an orphan package. [!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
[Bug 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #5 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #4) I am reworking the package to mark /usr/share/megaglest/docs/ as %doc, but it is installed: $ rpm -ql megaglest-data | grep megaglest/docs /usr/share/megaglest/docs /usr/share/megaglest/docs/AUTHORS.data.txt I'm pretty sure you know all of this, but I'm writing here anyway :D Asimple %doc tag in the files section should be enough, i.e.: %files %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc docs/* This way they will end up in: /usr/share/doc/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3 -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
--- Comment #6 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com ---
I am trying to not mess with upstream install. In that case it would be
required to rm -fr the docs subdir from buildroot in %install.
Would it be ok to add a symlink? For example:
ln -s %{_datadir}/megaglest/docs %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
(still uploading the new package...)
--
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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #7 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- BTW, the docs subdir is also, kind of shared with the arch specific megaglest package, so, megaglest must require megaglest-data. -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 --- Comment #8 from pcpa paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andr...@gmail.com --- I removed the previous one as I am running out of quota space in fedorapeople.org and this package is very large. Only did not properly address the megaglest-data requires back megaglest as I am not sure how to make a requires of a arch specific package from a noarch one (should just work as Requires: megaglest I guess...) Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pcpa/megaglest-data.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~pcpa/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3-2.fc18.src.rpm -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544
--- Comment #9 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I am trying to not mess with upstream install. In that case it would be
required to rm -fr the docs subdir from buildroot in %install.
Would it be ok to add a symlink? For example:
ln -s %{_datadir}/megaglest/docs %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
Well, unless the game requires at runtime to access its docs (an ingame menu,
or something like that) marking them as docs and leave rpmbuild do its things
(i.e. put everything in %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}) is not a problem.
You cannot do the link, but what you did is ok, only it does the thing half
way, when installed it ends up like this:
%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/docs/files
In my opinion should be better %doc %{_datadir}/megaglest/docs/* as it will
end up like this:
%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/files
thus removing the docs subdirectory in the document directory. Otherwise is ok.
(In reply to comment #7)
BTW, the docs subdir is also, kind of shared with the arch specific megaglest
package, so, megaglest must require megaglest-data.
You could create a megaglest-docs subpackage if you want. And if the main
megaglest has again the license file is ok to leave it in both packages, as
that is part of the guidelines to leave the license everywhere, i.e:
/usr/share/doc/megaglest-3.6.0.3/license.txt
/usr/share/doc/megaglest-data-3.6.0.3/license.txt
(In reply to comment #8)
Only did not properly address the megaglest-data requires back megaglest as I
am not sure how to make a requires of a arch specific package from a noarch
one (should just work as Requires: megaglest I guess...)
You can't do that, but the generic one it's not a problem as it should work
anyway, yum will first pick the same arch version if available and then the
next one.
I'm waiting to put package approved on this just because I want to review
also megaglest.
Thanks,
--Simone
--
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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||negativ...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|negativ...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 828544] Review Request: megaglest-data - Mega Glest data files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=828544 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||817315 -- 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
