[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

leigh scott  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||leigh123li...@gmail.com
 Blocks||2407

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

Nicolas Chauvet kwiz...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|33  |

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #22 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-03-01 09:44:34 
CET ---
My first official review... Could someone please look over my shoulder about
the bundled icons, am I judging this correct?


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 (i386).
[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
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
 Contains a subset of icons from oxygen-icon-theme, a corner case.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm  4.4
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: 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
[x]: 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.
 pkg dir seems to contain MIT-type licenses for both MacOS and w32.
 Icons seems to be either MIT or LGPL3+
[!]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
 Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[!]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
 OK besides what's noted in other remarks.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generates 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.
[!]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
 Texinfo snippets in %post and %preun lacks corresponding deps.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent, also on installed package.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
 MD5SUM this package : 8110094f05c02667760eda720f84618f
 MD5SUM upstream package : 8110094f05c02667760eda720f84618f

[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.
[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.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (attached below).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
 Looked at some clips without problems, but no 3D gear available.
[-]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
 upstream.
[!]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
 justified.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[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.
[?]: 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.
[-]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of 

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #24 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-03-01 12:42:32 
CET ---
Licensing experts are rare out here... I learned a little reading your reply :)

Basically, I can follow your arguments and they seem to be sound. However, the
oxygen icons still worries me, partly because I'm not completely sure that they
are not a bundled library issue. From a formal point of view they are(?)
OTOH, the major argument not to bundle, security, just makes no sense here.
More practically, bundling a set of icons is so common that making it a problem
 might be to open Pandora's box without any reasonable purpose.

I'll wait until tomorrow. Unless there's more input on this issue then, I'll
approve.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #25 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2012-03-01 
13:43:21 CET ---
(In reply to comment #24)
 However, the
 oxygen icons still worries me, partly because I'm not completely sure that 
 they
 are not a bundled library issue. From a formal point of view they are(?)
 OTOH, the major argument not to bundle, security, just makes no sense here.
 More practically, bundling a set of icons is so common that making it a 
 problem
  might be to open Pandora's box without any reasonable purpose.
 
It makes sense to me. I will try to unbundle them. Please stay tuned.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #26 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2012-03-01 
14:49:23 CET ---
Unbundled oxygen icons, new files:
http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/bino-1.2.1-3.fc16.src.rpm
http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/bino.spec

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|2   |4

--- Comment #27 from Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com 2012-03-01 14:58:56 
CET ---
All open issues resolved. Fast progress, indeed :)

***Approved

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #28 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2012-03-01 
15:23:33 CET ---
Alec thanks for your review.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #20 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2012-02-29 
14:37:03 CET ---
Any volunteer to move this review forward? I think it shouldn't be hard to get
this finished. I am ready to swap this for other rpmfusion/fedora review.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #19 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2011-11-29 
22:39:32 CET ---
For all interested, there are currently Fedora tickets for inclusion of vmmlib
and Equalizer. All comments are welcome.

http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758470
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758472

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #18 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2011-11-16 
11:25:35 CET ---
(In reply to comment #17)
 Would you like to swap this review for gmtk?
 https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1958

No problem to swap, but unfortunately I was not fast enough this time.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

Julian Sikorski beleg...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||beleg...@gmail.com

--- Comment #17 from Julian Sikorski beleg...@gmail.com 2011-11-14 22:07:34 
CET ---
Would you like to swap this review for gmtk?
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1958

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #15 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2011-11-09 
14:53:45 CET ---
(In reply to comment #14)
 Jaroslav,
 
 I've integrated your changes into our 1.0 tree. Can you test
 https://github.com/Eyescale/Equalizer/tree/1.0 to see if you can build an RPM
 without patches? I'll then go ahead and tag the 1.0.2 release.

Stefan,

thanks for incorporating this upstream. It builds fine now. I can maintain it
in Fedora and I will open Fedora tickets - I will let you know (put links
here).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #16 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2011-11-09 
20:01:24 CET ---
Version bump:
http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/bino-1.2.1-1.fc17.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #14 from Stefan Eilemann eilem...@gmail.com 2011-11-09 08:43:32 
CET ---
Jaroslav,

I've integrated your changes into our 1.0 tree. Can you test
https://github.com/Eyescale/Equalizer/tree/1.0 to see if you can build an RPM
without patches? I'll then go ahead and tag the 1.0.2 release.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #12 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2011-11-07 
12:24:48 CET ---
(In reply to comment #11)
 Can you send me the changes (and spec file additions) for Equalizer and 
 vmmlib?
 I'll the incorporate them into the repositories.
 
The Equalizer spec and patch needed for build is in srpm in comment 10. As a
source I used the spec from comment 8.
I think it could go to Fedora (AFAIK LGPL license, no forbidden requires), thus
I will probably create Fedora review request ticket when I handle the minor
issues (e.g. vmmlib). Or is there another volunteer here?

I haven't packaged the vmmlib yet. On the first look it seems easy, but I
didn't have time to look more deep on it. I also think it could go to Fedora
(AFAIK BSD license), I will probably open separate review request ticket on
Fedora.


Guys, could we go ahead with the bino review? I think it is mostly done. The
current srpm compiles fine with and also without Equalizer. We could add it
without Equalizer now and later when Equalizer gets into Fedora, we could
simply add BuildRequires and rebuild.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #13 from Stefan Eilemann eilem...@gmail.com 2011-11-07 13:58:44 
CET ---
(In reply to comment #12)
 I will probably create Fedora review request ticket when I handle the minor
 issues (e.g. vmmlib). Or is there another volunteer here?

Not that I am aware of.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

Stefan Eilemann eilem...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||eilem...@gmail.com

--- Comment #11 from Stefan Eilemann eilem...@gmail.com 2011-11-06 16:02:22 
CET ---
Jaroslav,

Can you send me the changes (and spec file additions) for Equalizer and vmmlib?
I'll the incorporate them into the repositories.

Regarding vmmlib: It is indeed a separate project, but has not yet been
packaged properly.

Regarding Equalizer/Collage: The idea is that they become separate packages,
but there is some non-trivial work left in untangling the build system. I don't
think it's too much of a problem to leave them in one package from now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

--- Comment #10 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com 2011-11-01 
23:44:51 CET ---
FFmpeg-0.7.5 is in f15 updates and f14 is nearly dead, thus we can probably go
with only one build.

I fixed compilation of Equalizer, srpm:
http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/Equalizer-1.0.1-1.fc17.src.rpm

But there are still rpmlint issues that needs to be fixed. 

The vmmlib seems to be bundled. It is required otherwise the bino doesn't
compile with Equalizer. The vmmlib is template library for vector matrix math,
home: http://vmmlib.sourceforge.net/ I could package it for Fedora.

Also the Equalizer contains two projects - the equalizer and the collage (home:
http://www.equalizergraphics.com/downloads.html). Maybe it could be split into
two packages.

I tested it with bino. It requires another explicit link with glew, then it
compiles fine. 

Updated bino srpm: http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/bino-1.1.3-3.fc17.src.rpm

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901


Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||r...@greysector.net




--- Comment #9 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski r...@greysector.net  
2011-09-21 15:06:27 ---
FYI: F-15 branch is going to have FFmpeg-0.7.4 soon, so there's no need to
package an older version there. FFmpeg-0.7.4 in F-14 is also a possibility.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901





--- Comment #4 from Richard hobbes1...@gmail.com  2011-09-19 21:39:03 ---
I was not able to build this on F15 due to ffmpeg not being new enough. It also
failed under mock for F16 but that may be an RPM Fusion repo issue. I was able
to get it to build under rawhide.

Which releases were you planning on building for?

Richard


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901





--- Comment #5 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com  2011-09-19 
22:24:51 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
 Which releases were you planning on building for?
 
The most recent bino from comment 4 can be now probably only build for rawhide
due to ffmpeg dependency. This one I am most interested in.

For F14-F16, specific older bino versions have to be used (SPECs from the end
of comment 1). I can also build them (and apply comments from comment 2 to
them).


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901





--- Comment #6 from Richard hobbes1...@gmail.com  2011-09-19 22:41:36 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
 (In reply to comment #4)
  Which releases were you planning on building for?
  
 The most recent bino from comment 4 can be now probably only build for rawhide
 due to ffmpeg dependency. This one I am most interested in.

Figures :)


 For F14-F16, specific older bino versions have to be used (SPECs from the end
 of comment 1). I can also build them (and apply comments from comment 2 to
 them).

OK.

As a side note I looked into building Equalizer since it's an optional
dependency but it requires a newer version of OpenSceneGraph than is available
for F15.

Let me know if you're interested. I'll package up an (unfinished) SRPM in its
current state. It's got some bundled libs I haven't had a chance to look into
yet.

Richard


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901





--- Comment #7 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com  2011-09-20 
00:49:29 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
 (In reply to comment #5)
  (In reply to comment #4)
   Which releases were you planning on building for?
   
  The most recent bino from comment 4 can be now probably only build for 
  rawhide
  due to ffmpeg dependency. This one I am most interested in.
 
 Figures :)
 
From the configure it requires FFmpeg = 0.7, I successfully built it for F16
from the provided SPEC. 

 As a side note I looked into building Equalizer since it's an optional
 dependency but it requires a newer version of OpenSceneGraph than is available
 for F15.
 
 Let me know if you're interested. I'll package up an (unfinished) SRPM in its
 current state. It's got some bundled libs I haven't had a chance to look into
 yet.
 
Great, I am interested.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901





--- Comment #8 from Richard hobbes1...@gmail.com  2011-09-20 02:16:23 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
 (In reply to comment #6)
  Let me know if you're interested. I'll package up an (unfinished) SRPM in 
  its
  current state. It's got some bundled libs I haven't had a chance to look 
  into
  yet.
  
 Great, I am interested.

Here's the SRPM:

http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/Equalizer/Equalizer-1.0.1-1.fc15.src.rpm

I think I have all or most of the build requires figured out but I can't be
sure since I couldn't build it.

You'll notice in the configuration that it unpacks from headers for vmml, I'm
not sure what that is or if it constitutes a bundled library.

Richard 


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901





--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com  2011-09-14 
21:30:28 ---
Richard,

thanks. Updated SPEC and SRPM according to your comments are there:

SPEC URL: http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/bino/bino.spec
SRPM URL: http://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/bino/bino-1.1.3-2.fc17.src.rpm

BTW: The ld-fix patch was accepted by upstream and will be included in their
next release.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

Re: [Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[Michael Schwendt]

On Fri,  2 Sep 2011 18:40:41 +0200, RFB (RPM) wrote:

 http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901

 --- Comment #2 from Richard  hobbes1069 gmail com   2011-09-02 18:40:41 ---
 The spec file looks pretty good overall. A couple of things I would change.
 
 1. You don't need %defattr(... in %files anymore.
 
 2. I would use this trick to get all the documentation into one directory:
 
 In %install:
 mkdir _tmpdoc

rm -rf _tmpdoc ; mkdir _tmpdoc

to restart with an empty _tmpdoc dir, e.g. for --short-circuit installs.

 mv %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/* _tmpdoc/
 rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc
 
 In %files:
 %doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog README _tmpdoc/*

-- 
Fedora release 16 (Verne) - Linux 3.1.0-0.rc4.git0.0.fc16.x86_64
loadavg: 0.16 0.20 0.22

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901


Richard hobbes1...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||hobbes1...@gmail.com




--- Comment #2 from Richard hobbes1...@gmail.com  2011-09-02 18:40:41 ---
The spec file looks pretty good overall. A couple of things I would change.

1. You don't need %defattr(... in %files anymore.

2. I would use this trick to get all the documentation into one directory:

In %install:
mkdir _tmpdoc
mv %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/* _tmpdoc/
rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/doc

In %files:
%doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog README _tmpdoc/*


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 1901] Review request: bino - 3D video player

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1901


Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|30  |




--- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Škarvada jskar...@redhat.com  2011-08-22 
17:25:28 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
 This is my first rpmfusion package, but I am packaging for Fedora/RHEL (FAS:
 jskarvad). Thus, I probably need sponsor for rpmfusion.
 
I don't need sponsor according to:
http://lists.rpmfusion.org/pipermail/rpmfusion-developers/2011-August/010064.html
I updated this review request accordingly.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.