[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #47 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Hi Antonio, Sorry for the delayed reply. Since this is my first package, my sponsor asked me to have mastered the procedure, which was tricky for me. so, I will probably remain upstream, and if some one find this interesting, is welcome to package it. -- 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 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #48 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- (In reply to RudraB from comment #47) Hi Antonio, Sorry for the delayed reply. Since this is my first package, my sponsor asked me to have mastered the procedure, which was tricky for me. so, I will probably remain upstream, and if some one find this interesting, is welcome to package it. If you're not interested anymore, please close this review request, so someone else can candidate himself to package this software. ;) -- 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 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||limburg...@gmail.com Component|Package Review |zzuf Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed||2013-11-03 12:18:48 -- 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 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Comment #46 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com --- Hi baptu. ptbl 2.0 is out since June 2013. Are you still interested to package this application ? -- 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 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||susi.leht...@iki.fi
--- Comment #43 from Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi ---
As you are upstream, why are the man page and the desktop file not part of the
standard distribution tarball?
You need to document the sources of these files as per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL
**
The %install section looks a bit messed up. Please remove empty statements such
as
find %{buildroot} -type f
and the line continuations from
desktop-file-install --dir=%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications %{SOURCE2}
as you are using longer lines than that just below.
As you are using desktop-file-install, there's no need to run
desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
Also the statement
rm -vf %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/images/ptbl.png
install -p -D -m 0644 images/*
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/images/%{name}.png
install -p -D -m 0644 images/* %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/%{name}.png
is rather odd. First of all, the use of the * wildcard would suggest that there
are many files to install, but from the syntax it seems that it's just a single
file. Why not type out the full filename (which probably is just pbtl.png)?
Note that the -v and -f flags to rm are somewhat unnecessary, as the rm command
is still shown in the rpmbuild output.
**
You are mixing ptbl and %{name}, which is bad style. Please choose a single
form and stick with it.
**
In the %files section
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/images/%{name}.png
makes the RPM package own just that file, but the RPM also creates the
directories
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/images/
which end up unowned. Changing the statement to
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual
or preferably
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/
for the sake of clarity will fix this issue.
**
Lastly, the %changelog is a wall of text. Please separate the entries with a
single blank line.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Nigv1ztV2Za=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #44 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk ---
(In reply to comment #43)
As you are upstream, why are the man page and the desktop file not part of
the standard distribution tarball?
Since this is my first project(both as a packager and upstreamer), initially
there is no man/desktop file(I had help as the style of gnome). I add them
later to meet the requirement of fedora. Now, once the evolution started,
changeing the content of source is discouraged. That is why it is what it is.
Once the review is over (and if it is selected, ahem), I will create a update
soon, with those changes.
The %install section looks a bit messed up. Please remove empty statements
such as
find %{buildroot} -type f
and the line continuations from
desktop-file-install --dir=%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications %{SOURCE2}
as you are using longer lines than that just below.
As you are using desktop-file-install, there's no need to run
desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
Also the statement
rm -vf %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/images/ptbl.png
install -p -D -m 0644 images/*
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/images/%{name}.png
install -p -D -m 0644 images/* %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/%{name}.png
is rather odd. First of all, the use of the * wildcard would suggest that
there are many files to install, but from the syntax it seems that it's just
a single file. Why not type out the full filename (which probably is just
pbtl.png)?
Note that the -v and -f flags to rm are somewhat unnecessary, as the rm
command is still shown in the rpmbuild output.
**
You are mixing ptbl and %{name}, which is bad style. Please choose a single
form and stick with it.
**
In the %files section
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/images/%{name}.png
makes the RPM package own just that file, but the RPM also creates the
directories
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/C/images/
which end up unowned. Changing the statement to
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual
or preferably
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/ptbl-manual/
for the sake of clarity will fix this issue.
**
Lastly, the %changelog is a wall of text. Please separate the entries with a
single blank line.
Noted. I have changed spec as suggested. Looks prettier.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=j0mXohWYVqa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #45 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- changeing the content of source is discouraged. Of course, but when you modified the 1.0 source tarball, you could have released it as 1.0.1, saving the extra work for the added files in the spec file. ;-) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VvssznGvWAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #42 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- An updated spec and srpm is uploaded at http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl-1.0-11.fc18.src.rpm http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl.spec %changelog * Mon Jan 21 2013 Rudra Banerjee rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk - 1.0-11 -Desktop icon and help pictures corrected. rpmlint -i ./ptbl.spec ../SRPMS/ptbl-1.0-11.fc18.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/ptbl-1.0-11.fc18.x86_64.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. I request the reviewers to have a look. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=05Rn4ljUdba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #32 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- No, sorry. I only use IRC when I must and when the real-time communication makes a little bit of sense at least. For Packaging related guidance, it is inefficient and a waste of time. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ZLL6z9iWq9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #33 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- I have modified the current spec file, known to have some error. The spec and rpmbuild -ba s log is at: http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl.spec.error http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl_rpmbuild.log The error is: error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/images/ptbl.png Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/share/images/ptbl.png Any guidance please? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fRTZFetPG5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #34 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Well, that's one of the most basic packaging mistakes:
Your %files section must list the actual files that are installed into the
%buildroot. Ptbl installs /usr/share/images/ptbl.png but you've changed the
%files entry to %{_datadir}/%{name}/images/ptbl.png
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nV7aF0RuIFa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #35 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk ---
according to your comment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541#c14, and as policy, I should
install the image at %{_datadir}/%{name}/images/ptbl.png
So, can you kindly tell me what should I change in %install, i tried to install
that using:
install -p -m 0755 images/* %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/images/%{name}.png
But it is not working.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Fsh8zEffwsa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #36 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Hmmm, treat it a bit more like homework. ;-) You currently do this:
| %install
| make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
| %find_lang ptbl-manual --with-gnome
| find %{buildroot} -type f
You've added the find command there probably because you want to examine the
%buildroot contents. Examine the rpmbuild output to see what files get
installed into there by the make install … invocation. Adjust the %files
section accordingly. Repeat that step for every file/dir you install manually
in the %install section.
If you like to learn about an advanced packaging technique, note that you can
save yourself the rebuilding/compiling of the program (which can be helpful for
much larger programs). You can run rpmbuild --short-circuit -bi ptbl.spec to
process only the %install section. Repeatedly and till the %files section will
be correct and rpmbuild will be happy.
install -p -m 0755 images/* %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}/images/%{name}.png
But it is not working.
Sure it is! You neglect the fact that ptbl's make install … installs the
image file to a different location. That's the place rpmbuild complains about,
because there is no matching entry in %files anymore.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qGDglGmVDTa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #37 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Corrected spec and srpm uploaded: http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl-1.0-10.fc18.src.rpm http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl.spec $ rpmlint -i ./ptbl.spec ../SRPMS/ptbl-1.0-10.fc18.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/ptbl-1.0-10.fc18.x86_64.rpm ./ptbl.spec:37: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 37, tab: line 1) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. ptbl.src:37: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 37, tab: line 1) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=n2HSWEAihLa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@zarb.org --- Comment #38 from Michael Scherer m...@zarb.org --- Discusing with rudraB on irc, i am ok to sponsor him. Rudra, can you contact me once you have a few moment ( either by mail or on irc ), so we can discuss a bit ( while i figure what I should do as a sponsor also ) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nQPSqrrLa8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #39 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- (In reply to comment #38) Discusing with rudraB on irc, i am ok to sponsor him. Rudra, can you contact me once you have a few moment ( either by mail or on irc ), so we can discuss a bit ( while i figure what I should do as a sponsor also ) Michael, Thanks a lot! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=is8OjwvKz8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #40 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- [Desktop Entry] Icon=ptbl Does that work? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Icon_tag_in_Desktop_Files Here's an interesting albeit old thread about Where should icons for desktop files be stored?: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2008-July/004817.html It goes back and forth a bit, but then points at the freedesktop specs, such as: http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html#install_icons -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Sa0hfzXtsja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #41 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- (In reply to comment #40) [Desktop Entry] Icon=ptbl Does that work? yesits working..as the short name convention. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cmQToD66H7a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #16 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- This issue is discussed in detail in #fedora-devel and it is suggested that this will be automatically corrected in final update in fedora. No, please fix it during review. In particular since you will need to build an updated src.rpm anyway. You need to understand that warning, and it is very easy to fix this rather harmless one with a chmod 0644 ptbl-1.0.tar.gz prior to building the src.rpm. It is nothing that will be corrected automatically, because you need to give files inside the src.rpm (and later in Fedora dist git, where this is much more important) proper default ownership and permissions. Will try to write the man page today and tomorrow. Do notice that rpmlint says SHOULD and not MUST. The review guidelines say: | SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. | If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. Where they make sense may be an important part here. Unless you plan to add lots of command-line options to ptbl, its man page probably won't explain more than that ptbl is a graphical app and repeating a brief description and license information. That won't be very helpful. Especially not on an RPM based platform, where one can examine files also via their packages. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qlEhvj3PzUa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #17 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- New spec and srpm is uploaded in http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/PTBL/ptbl-1.0-7.fc18.src.rpm http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/PTBL/ptbl.spec this is for quick update, and still have problems with man page and .desktop files. That will be changed soon(working on that). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=P9OxJdj6nMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #18 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- current status: x86_64]$ rpmlint -i ./ptbl-1.0-7.fc18.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i ./ptbl-1.0-7.fc18.src.rpm ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl.spec 0600L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. koji build --scratch f19 ./ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm Uploading srpm: ./ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm [] 100% 00:00:01 157.78 KiB 84.78 KiB/sec Created task: 4881763 Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4881763 . 0 free 0 open 3 done 0 failed 4881763 build (f19, ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm) completed successfully Please check the updated spec and srpm at: http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/PTBL/ptbl.spec http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/PTBL/ptbl-1.0-7.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DMSDbtASURa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #20 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Since spec file is not accessible, http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl.spec http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7Yt8J2fDIja=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #19 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- (In reply to comment #18) Please check the updated spec and srpm at: http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/PTBL/ptbl.spec http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/PTBL/ptbl-1.0-7.fc18.src.rpm spec file is not reachable for me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nNHydHH1GXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #21 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Antonio Trande, Sorry for the inconvenience. Please checke comment no. 20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ssedHBe94ia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #22 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- IMHO, at present the only problem is the desktop icon, every thing else looks ok. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8x7FwuUwrCa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #23 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com ---
(In reply to comment #20)
Since spec file is not accessible,
http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl.spec
http://web.warwick.ac.uk/~phslav/ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm
Both links must be accessible and .spec file must be updated like that one in
the src.rpm
Please read
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage.
%{_bindir}/%name is wrong. %{_bindir}/%{name}
'%file' section seems uncomplete and must be separated from '%changelog'
section.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Y6uW0sf2x2a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #24 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- is any file still not accessible? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=u16mI1MTWta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #25 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
Both downloads are accessible, but why do you refuse to fix the permissions of
the files inside the src.rpm? This time it's the spec file:
$ rpmlint ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm
ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl.spec 0600L
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
That could be due to a systematic error at your side, such as a wrong umask
value.
[...]
install -p -D -m 0644 %{SOURCE2}
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/ptbl.desktop
Indeed, re-reading the Desktop Files guidelines is recommended:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files
$ cat ptbl.desktop
[Desktop Entry]
Type=Application
Exec=ptbl
Name=ptbl
Categories=Utility;GTK;
Icon=ptbl.png
X-Desktop-File-Install-Version=0.21
The icon is not found so far.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Icon_tag_in_Desktop_Files
Name=Periodic Table
would be much better.
Summary: Periodic_Table
A dubious '_' in there. ;-)
Source0:
http://download-mirror.savannah.gnu.org/releases/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
This doesn't pass the guidelines yet:
| MUST: The sources used to build the package must match
| the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [...]
|
| https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
$ md5sum ptbl-1.0.tar.gz
cbf3cedbe8a5a7909e7e2b033add7031 ptbl-1.0.tar.gz
$ rm -f ptbl-1.0.tar.gz
$ spectool -g ptbl.spec
...
$ md5sum ptbl-1.0.tar.gz
8fcddcbbdfc2e5e07d1cd454b86703f3 ptbl-1.0.tar.gz
%description
-Periodic Table application
+Periodic Table application. Each element shows a list of \
+physical/chemical properties, mainly focusing at the need \
+of Condensed Matter Physicist and Material Scientist.
Backslashes at the end are unusual in %description and are NOT necessary.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=y7CmT7ng2Fa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #26 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- It seems you've re-released a modified ptbl-1.0.tar.gz several times - that should not have happened. Better not get used to it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GmQurQgIcYa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #27 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- (In reply to comment #26) It seems you've re-released a modified ptbl-1.0.tar.gz several times - that should not have happened. Better not get used to it. This is done purely because of the man file confusion. I will try not to do that in future. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5ETR4adJnDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #28 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- (In reply to comment #25) Both downloads are accessible, but why do you refuse to fix the permissions of the files inside the src.rpm? This time it's the spec file: $ rpmlint ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl.spec 0600L 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. That could be due to a systematic error at your side, such as a wrong umask value. Actually I tried a lot, but dont know what's causing the problem. In my sourcedir, I do have 0644. Not sure how its chaning. I even set it manually in SOURCE, which does not refelct in build -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QMDNTHPOrva=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #29 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com --- $ rpmls -p ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm -rw-rw-r-- ptbl-1.0.tar.gz -rw-rw-r-- ptbl.1 -rw-rw-r-- ptbl.desktop -rw--- ptbl.spec How do you build your src.rpm from the individual files? $ umask 0022 $ rpm -i ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm warning: user rudra does not exist - using root warning: group rudra does not exist - using root warning: user rudra does not exist - using root warning: group rudra does not exist - using root warning: user rudra does not exist - using root warning: group rudra does not exist - using root warning: user rudra does not exist - using root warning: group rudra does not exist - using root $ cd ~/…/SOURCES/ptbl-1.0 $ chmod 0644 * $ rpmbuild -bs ptbl.spec Wrote: ~/…/SRPMS/ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm $ rpmls -p ~/…/SRPMS/ptbl-1.0-8.fc18.src.rpm -rw-r--r-- ptbl-1.0.tar.gz -rw-r--r-- ptbl.1 -rw-r--r-- ptbl.desktop -rw-r--r-- ptbl.spec Voila! How do you do it? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pJoR7Eoiqua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #30 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- (In reply to comment #29) Voila! How do you do it? Not Sure! I have started with the spec and tar-ball, and ended up here! This error was obviously shown to me, as both user and group exists :( -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=1oOc7TrB6Fa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #31 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Michael Schwendt, are you available in #f-devel? can you provide me some time? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=SEZNrT7G9qa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #14 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com ---
$ rpmlint ./ptbl.spec ../SRPMS/ptbl-1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm
ptbl.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl-1.0.tar.gz 0600L
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
is the warning I am getting!
Run rpmlint -i on _all_ rpms, the src.rpm _and_ all built rpms. The -i option
will help you. Else ask.
I've downloaded the src.rpm from the koji scratch build, then used
rpmdev-extract to examine its contents:
* I agree with comment 8.
BuildRequires: rarian-compat
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Scrollkeeper
I wonder why it uses scrollkeeper and runs no-op commands like
scrollkeeper-update?
%description
Periodic Table application
A few more words would be good. Not to explain what a periodic table is, but
what the application can do. I mean, currently the %summary is even longer than
the %descripton, and the description on your web page is better, too. ;)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description
/usr/bin/ptbl
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files
%{_datadir}/images
That's an odd location for an application's images. Shouldn't it create its
very own subdirectory as /usr/share/ptbl/images instead? The FHS suggests that.
$ repoquery --whatprovides /usr/share/images
linphone-mediastreamer-0:3.5.2-5.fc18.x86_64
linphone-0:3.5.2-4.fc18.x86_64
linphone-mediastreamer-0:3.5.2-5.fc18.i686
linphone-0:3.5.2-4.fc18.i686
- bug 896735
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ywrYdlFXjCa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #15 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Michael Schwendt, Thanks for your detailed review. $ rpmlint -i ./ptbl-1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl-1.0.tar.gz 0600L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. This issue is discussed in detail in #fedora-devel and it is suggested that this will be automatically corrected in final update in fedora. So, probably I can ignore this for the time being. Please comment. ptbl.src:14: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 14, tab: line 1) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. Its probably more to do with style, but I will surely make it coherent in the next update(I have to write the man page, see below). $ rpmlint -i ./ptbl-1.0-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm ptbl.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0-6 ['1.0-1.fc18', '1.0-1'] The latest entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. I will change that accordingly ptbl.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ptbl-1.0/AUTHORS Will remove it ptbl.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ptbl Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. Will try to write the man page today and tomorrow. Please allow me some time. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. I have already edited the image file path. After the man page is done and an svg as icon (I already have a .desktop file), I will resubmit the spec and srpm. Or please let me know. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PID6ggEbwXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trp...@katamail.com
--- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com ---
Hi RubraB.
Just few initial comments.
- Buildroot tag is necessary only if this package will be supported in EPEL5
and below. If it be so, The BuildRoot value MUST be below %{_tmppath}/ and
MUST contain at least %{name}, %{version} and %{release}. It may invoke mktemp
since this is guaranteed to exist on every system. From there, packagers are
expected to use a sane BuildRoot.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#BuildRoot_tag
- NEWS and README files are empty. They can be erased.
- Changelog is empty. Why ?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs
- You should consider macros' use. For instance:
%{_bindir}/%{name} instead %{_bindir}/ptbl
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qy16bpHXwJa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #2 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Antonio Trande, spec file is changed according to your suggestion and new spec and srpm uploaded in the same url -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xUCetF9rHXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #3 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- (In reply to comment #2) Antonio Trande, spec file is changed according to your suggestion and new spec and srpm uploaded in the same url Not quite right. ;) At the comment #2 I add: - Group tag is optional (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag), however 'Education' is not valid as you can see by using 'rpmlint' command: $ rpmlint -I non-standard-group non-standard-group: The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid. Valid groups are: Amusements/Games, Amusements/Graphics, Applications/Archiving, Applications/Communications, Applications/Databases, Applications/Editors, Applications/Emulators, Applications/Engineering, Applications/File, Applications/Internet, Applications/Multimedia, Applications/Productivity, Applications/Publishing, Applications/System, Applications/Text, Development/Debug, Development/Debuggers, Development/Languages, Development/Libraries, Development/System, Development/Tools, Documentation, System Environment/Base, System Environment/Daemons, System Environment/Kernel, System Environment/Libraries, System Environment/Shells, Unspecified, User Interface/Desktops, User Interface/X, User Interface/X Hardware Support. - 'BuildRequires: gnome-doc-utils = 0.3.2' is missing. - Your package should own all of the files that are installed as part of the %install process. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership In my opinion, you should do some changes. ;) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zDToIHMTFoa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #4 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- Hi Antonio, Thanks for review. I have done other changes, but confused about ownership point. I re-read the section you pointed, but still clueless. what should I do? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=9yJX1Njj4Ca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #5 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- $ rpmlint ./ptbl.spec ../SRPMS/ptbl-1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm ptbl.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl-1.0.tar.gz 0600L 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. is the warning I am getting! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=uVwDB4QrUFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #6 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com --- (In reply to comment #4) Hi Antonio, Thanks for review. I have done other changes, but confused about ownership point. I re-read the section you pointed, but still clueless. what should I do? All files/directories created by package must be owned of package; for instance: $ rpm -q --list htop /usr/bin/htop /usr/share/doc/htop-1.0.2 /usr/share/doc/htop-1.0.2/AUTHORS /usr/share/doc/htop-1.0.2/COPYING /usr/share/doc/htop-1.0.2/ChangeLog /usr/share/doc/htop-1.0.2/README /usr/share/man/man1/htop.1.gz /usr/share/pixmaps/htop.png The '%file' section must contain all instructions to do that according to the Guidelines. Read also http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5rIa0BHyDia=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #7 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk ---
Do you mean adding something like:
%defattr(644,root,root,755)
%attr(755,root,root) %{_bindir}/*
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hlvr54ei6Ua=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Comment #8 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu --- One small suggestion (pet peave of mine), I'd suggest removing from Summary/%description the phrase: written on C and GTK for GNOME desktop end users generally don't care or need what language the app is written in, annd unless it *only* runs on gnome, don't mention that either. (if you disagree, at least fix the grammar to say in instead of on) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tvkN8cPvrAa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #9 from Antonio Trande trp...@katamail.com ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Do you mean adding something like:
%defattr(644,root,root,755)
%attr(755,root,root) %{_bindir}/*
No.
For instance:
Your package includes some sub-directories in the directory
'/usr/share/gnome/help'; those sub-directories contain .xml files. Therefore on
the '%file' section these must be indicated as owned of package.
'ptbl' binary is owned of package; ... and so on.
So:
%files
%doc COPYING
%{_bindir}/%{name}
%dir %{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}-manual
%{_datadir}/gnome/help/%{name}-manual/*/*.xml
...
ptbl.src: W: strange-permission ptbl-1.0.tar.gz 0600L
Set the right permission for this file by editing .spec file
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues?rd=PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#strange-permission
Now, you have everything necessary in order to complete your spec file. :)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=l7y9WphOOta=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541
--- Comment #10 from Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com ---
Some drive-by comments:
1) Should use the %{version} in the %Source URL, this way there's only one
place where you need to update the version number afterwards.
2)
BuildRequires:atk
BuildRequires:gdk-pixbuf2
BuildRequires:pango
These should probably read 'atk-devel', 'gdk-pixbuf2', and 'pango-devel'
instead. The -devel packages have the needed .so symlinks / pkgconfig files
that are needed for linking against these libraries.
Note that it would probably be safe to just remove these 3 lines; gtk2-devel
should drag them in by its requires. But you can list them explicitly too if
you want to, either way works.
You can verify that all the needed BuildRequires are in place by doing koji
scratch builds. Follow the instructions at the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Install_the_client_tools_.28Koji.29_and_set_up_your_certificate
page and then adjust the build requires until the scratch builds succeed. 'koji
build --scratch ptbl-1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm'.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7jQhQvaJPza=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kalevlem...@gmail.com --- Comment #11 from Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com --- %changelog * Tue Jan 15 2013 Rudra Banerjee rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk -Initial Package -spec file changed as per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541#c1 -spec file updated: -- install and file field edited as suggest by kalev and rdieter in #fedora-devel A nitpick about the %changelog format. In Fedora, we use the following format: %changelog * Tue Jan 15 2013 Rudra Banerjee rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk - 1.0-3 - spec file updated: install and file field edited as suggest by kalev and rdieter in #fedora-devel * Tue Jan 15 2013 Rudra Banerjee rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk - 1.0-2 - spec file changed as per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541#c1 * Tue Jan 15 2013 Rudra Banerjee rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk - 1.0-1 - Initial Package -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=EXxOECQ7Uka=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 --- Comment #12 from RudraB rudra.baner...@aol.co.uk --- The scratch build are here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4871951 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PN58gjgQwoa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=LRzfRu1FXDa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 895541] Review Request: ptbl - Periodic Table
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=895541 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Alias||ptbl --- Comment #13 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- You are not sponsored yet in the packagers group, that's why I add FE-NEEDSPONSOR. Follow the guidelines to find a sponsor: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VSNqqu5r2Ta=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
